Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Andron 09-30-06, 10:30 AM	That fully believes that there are just way too many rules, variances on a rule, books, not enough time to read, memorize, and create an interesting adventure. If I don't know a rule, I just roll some dice and make **** up. It then becomes law in the campaign. If we later find out that there was a specific rule, we'll decide which works best for us and go with it for good. (There's just not enough time to go digging through books for a rule when you only meet for 4 hours once every other week, besides it destroys the illusion.) I'm not playing Warhammer miniatures or Champions here, I do not want a combat to take all night. We've instituted a rule where the person up in their turn of combat has ~20 seconds to tell me what he is doing or you lose your turn. (The pc knows well in advance when he's up in the round during combat.) This goes for me as well. If the group decides they need to rethink their strategy, I'll allow some time for that. But not too much time. I've got 8 pc's and I need to do something to speed up combat and keep the flow going. (I played in a group for about 15 years that had 8-16 people playing every week and we had to do something like this to keep the combat flowing and not bog down) All the feats that can be added now just adds to the complication, but is there any other way to speed things up besdies just limiting the books you can use? (I'm definately one for not letting the rules get in the way of the story.) [EDIT: Masking is against the CoC. Keep it clean]
alecthemad 09-30-06, 10:37 AM	I agree with you. I run my games with a limited set of books: the core 3, a campaign handbook, and one expansion for said campaign. It keeps the rules simple for everyone (especially me). I do allow exceptions on a case by case basis (allowing certain feats or a prestige class from a book). But most characters stick to the five books I usually allow. I have used a version of your 20 second rule before when I had a large group of 10 players (8 usually showed up at any one time). As far as making stuff up, I have used that and had someone search for the rule while the game continued. In a large group most players have 30 minutes between combat turns so they should have time to look it up. If the rule was more favorable than my ruling I give them some sort of bonus on their next turn.
RetiredThief 09-30-06, 10:48 AM	20 second rule. Like speed chess. I kinda like it. Bet your spell casters don't, as their character management is more time consuming. Here's a thought, though. Perhaps tie the amount of time a player has to execute their move to their characters stats? A player with a spell caster with big intelligence and/or wisdom stats could have lots of time, whereas a Barbarian with low Int and Wis would be more hurried, and often thus limited to simpler "Hulk Smash!" actions? That would allow slower players of "smart" characters to have that reflected ingame. And clever players of non-intellectual characters wouldn't be able to play them like geniuses?
fatal error 09-30-06, 11:36 AM	20 second rule. Like speed chess. I kinda like it. Bet your spell casters don't, as their character management is more time consuming. Here's a thought, though. Perhaps tie the amount of time a player has to execute their move to their characters stats? A player with a spell caster with big intelligence and/or wisdom stats could have lots of time, whereas a Barbarian with low Int and Wis would be more hurried, and often thus limited to simpler "Hulk Smash!" actions? That would allow slower players of "smart" characters to have that reflected ingame. And clever players of non-intellectual characters wouldn't be able to play them like geniuses? So what about the low-int clerics and druids, shouldn't they get enough time to decide what spell to use? If not to favor casters with more time, why bother with this? Anyway, I'm not really sure what you mean by too many variant rules and such. I know some people have trouble when it comes to things like trip, disarm, grapple, sunder and haven't ever really fully read the PHB descriptions of them, but that doesn't sound like your problem I actually can't think of any variant rules that a DM needs to know other than those found in Unearthed Arcana. Anything else, the player should know, and should have the responsibility of knowing it, and knowing it correctly. Of course, when it comes to spells I have some sympathy for you, with the entire Complete series our group's casters are constantly looking at five different books to figure out what to cast. So, what are these variant rules you're having trouble with, or is it new spells, feats and prestige abilities that the players should know that are bogging down your games? Either way, the 20 second rule sounds like a good idea, I might have to suggest it for our recently 8 person group.
BW0222 09-30-06, 11:41 AM	Andron, >That fully believes that there are just way too many rules, >variances on a rule, books, not enough time to read, >memorize, and create an interesting adventure. No. 3E was a big change from 1E/2E. It is far more 'realistic' (cover, firing into melee, AoOs, movement, etc.). However, that comes with several prices. One is that because the rules need to be rather percise to be both realistic and maintain game balance. Unfortunately in 3E, the game is so balanced upon the rules, that one mistake can easily TPK a party or make a 'trick' into an unstoppable cake walk for the party. Neither is fun. >If I don't know a rule, I just roll some dice and make s*** >up. It then becomes law in the campaign. ... >(There's just not enough time to go digging through books >for a rule when you only meet for 4 hours once every other >week, besides it destroys the illusion.) The other way of looking at it is... if you only get to play once every two weeks, you owe it to the other players to read up on the rules, learn your spells, etc. prior to showing up. This avoids rules arguements because everyone knows them. It is fine to say "It isn't important enough to waste time looking up/debating now... I'll rule this way." However, you own it to everyone to write it down, look it up after the game, and then let ever know at the beginning of the next session (or between sessions via e-mail). Continuing to use an incorrect ruling causes more problems in 3E than it solves. The rules are so percisely balanced. >I do not want a combat to take all night. We've instituted a >rule where the person up in their turn of combat has ~20 >seconds to tell me what he is doing or you lose your turn. Honestly, that doesn't make combat any faster. There are three factors which determine how long the overall combat takes -- (a) number of creatures, (b) time per initiative, and (c) number of rounds of combat. Your average combat lasts between 5 and 10 rounds. Typically you have 8 or so folks in initiative. With rice rolling, decisions, counting squares, AoOs, saving throws, drawing effects, talking, looking up character info, etc. the means about 1 minute per initiative (on average). A round of combat takes about 8-10 minutes. A typical combat lasting 50 to 100 minutes. The easiest way to reduce time is to reduce the number of rounds of combat. Kill the creatures quicker. This reduces both a) and c) in one go. It may also shorten b) for the other side. If it takes two minutes for a caster to place a fireball, look up a web spell, or see if they can do something which would potentially end the combat sooner ... it is definitely worth it. A druid, wizard, or sorceror might have much longer initiatives that other PCs... but they dramatically shorten combat. (I realize that it is infuriating for folks who honestly can't to anything to end combat sooner taking large amounts of time, but typically those who take longer are those which could end combat sooner.) The easiest way to increase time is to have PCs waste precious initiatives. You only get 5-8 or so. If the wizard can't look something up in 20 seconds and loses his turn, does that make combat any faster? No, typically the oppose happens. The bad guys aren't webbed, they close in on the wizard, he spends his next initiative casting defensive spells, the cleric wastes time healing him, the fighter drops because the cleric was wasting time with the wizard, etc. All you may have done is make a 5 round combat into a 15 round combat. The later will easily run twice as long. My recommendation... if a player takes more than X seconds to declare what they are going to do... just rule that they are delaying. Allow them to pop back into initiative when they finally look up something or otherwise make their decision. This way you don't dramatically increase the length of the combat by forcing missing of initatives. If they have delayed to the end of the round and still haven't decided what to do, then let them know and re-delay them.
aotrscommander 09-30-06, 11:46 AM	I, personally, have no problem with the amount of rules, but then again, I'm Rolemaster schooled, and only use slected bits. Rolemaster's companions were full of variant rules and options (many of which were exclusive to each other), so it got me used to the fact that not everything needs to be used - or even could be - from every book. Indeed, D&D's core rules aren't altered much in the splatbooks, there's just more stuff (classes, feats, skills); Rolemaster had variant rules for things like ability score bonuses, round sequence, heck even combat. So I use most of the classes, a few PrCs, and the spells and feats, but that's about it from the various splatbooks. I don't use Unearthed Arcana, so that eliminates some of the more significant variant options.
Andron 09-30-06, 03:12 PM	By varient rules, I'm talking about new feats, special powers granted by prestige classes, spells, etc... I really don't want to penalize a player for buying and wanting to use stuff out of a book I haven't read yet. Maybe the realism is what gets me. If I wanted "realistic" fights, I'd join a recreation group, or play miniature battles. I'm just trying to figure out how to get the combat down to the most basic elements, still allow the feats, and make it fast. It seems that almost all the feats are combat oriented. To me, combat is the most mundane part of the adventure. What I find more intresting is the story, plot, and intrigue that leads up to the combat. (And that's what I tailor my game towards.) I have players that enjoy the rp side more, or the combat side more, and a few enjoy both. I try to include everything every time we meet, but when the combat comes, everything just grinds to a halt. I really don't have to worry about a straight wizard, because the group doesn't have one. (They have a cleric, druid, rogue/wizard, monk, ranger, paladin, barbarian, and a homebrew character.) The numbers given for combat rounds is great, if everyone pays attention and know all the rules. But in all practicality, that just doesn't happen. It'd be great if it did happen that way, though. I find that my players wouldn't even think about what they were going to do next until it was their turn and then try to figure out what to do. The 20 second rule came about in the hopes of spurring the players into thinking about what they are doing before it became their turn. I actually have a few players that will roll the to hit and damage dice when they are on deck, next on the initiative order, and tell me what they are doing and what they rolled when I call out their name. Like I said earlier, time is precious. I do not have the time to read everything, create a story,etc... and do everything outside the game that needs to be done. (Family, work, etc...) I need to maximize my time I get to prepare for the game. (Which pretty much entails creating NPCs, encounters, treasure, maps, etc...a back story, making sure all the plot that is out there makes sense and can still be all tied together when all is said and done. Maybe I should just get a player/co-DM to help me for the combat, that might help. For making the rule up as I go along. It works and hasn't caused any issue. If a player researches it and my ruling and the "offical" rule are different I do what alecthemad mentioned if the offical rule was in their favor. I always write down whatever rule I make up on the spot. I guess the nice thing is is that my players really don't read the rules that really don't pertain to their character abilities. And whatever ruling goes for the players goes for me too. Perhaps I'll write up the 20 second rule some more and put it up in the homebrew section if people are interested in working it out further- hoping to make combat faster.
fatal error 09-30-06, 03:19 PM	I don't know, I guess the only thing I can fathom people taking for ever with (besides deciding what to do, but that's as much their fault as the rules) is looking up spell descriptions. To which I would respond with, "Either play a class that runs up and hits the enemy simply, or know what your stuff does before you try to do it."
aotrscommander 09-30-06, 03:57 PM	By varient rules, I'm talking about new feats, special powers granted by prestige classes, spells, etc... I really don't want to penalize a player for buying and wanting to use stuff out of a book I haven't read yet. Maybe the realism is what gets me. If I wanted "realistic" fights, I'd join a recreation group, or play miniature battles. I'm just trying to figure out how to get the combat down to the most basic elements, still allow the feats, and make it fast. It seems that almost all the feats are combat oriented. To me, combat is the most mundane part of the adventure. What I find more intresting is the story, plot, and intrigue that leads up to the combat. (And that's what I tailor my game towards.) I have players that enjoy the rp side more, or the combat side more, and a few enjoy both. I try to include everything every time we meet, but when the combat comes, everything just grinds to a halt. Well, if you're not a rule-smith (which is no denigration to you of course), then I can see why you might find it all a bit much. D&D is not rules-lite, by any means (which is one of the things I like about it; of course, it's not too rules-heavy either). I love Rolemaster dearly, but the mere mention of it causes a lot of gamers to cringe and go into spasms. You could attempt to limit the amount of non-core stuff (to reduce the amount of rules you have to worry about). However, your major issue seems to be with combat speed. What exactly is it about combat that is slowing it down (other than players taking to long to decide what to do, which you seem to be dealing with)? Do you lose any time in your own record keeping (who's turn it is and so on? It is that the player insist in using tactics/rules they don't know very well? On the decision-making side, have you suggested to the other players that they should spend the time that is not actually their turn deciding what to do? (I must confess, that playing with mostly wargamers as I do, I haven't encountered this problem very often.)
HauptSin 09-30-06, 04:37 PM	I'd say have the Spellcasters write up (or photocopy) quick blocks for their main spells, so they don't have to shuffle through their books for the blocks. Would speed things up a lot, I imagine. Have them cut through the flavour text stuff so a spell is even easier to reference. Example: Using the foul sight granted by the powers of unlife, you can determine the condition of creatures near death within the spell’s range. You instantly know whether each creature within the area is dead, fragile (alive and wounded, with 3 or fewer hit points left), fighting off death (alive with 4 or more hit points), undead, or neither alive nor dead (such as a construct). Deathwatch sees through any spell or ability that allows creatures to feign death. Turns into Know whether each creature within area is dead, fragile(3 or fewer hit points left), fighting off death (4 or more hit points), undead, or neither alive nor dead (such as a construct). Sees through creatures feigning death. Cuts down on the "Using the blah blah blah... Blah blah... Oh, here's what it does!" moments.
allenchan 09-30-06, 04:48 PM	If you and your group are fine with just using the core books and having a fun game with little combat, what are you complaining about? People have different play styles, and wotc makes money on them. You do not need to purchase books to stay up with everything. However, I will say that combat is dnd's strong suite, and if you are more interested in character developement and social interactions, there are other game systems that are better at conveying them. ..then again, they still have rules. As do all games. Maybe the realism is what gets me. If I wanted "realistic" fights, I'd join a recreation group, or play miniature battles. And dnd is definately not realistic, and with every additional supplement it gets FURTHER unrealistic with additional spells and feats and combat options (like tome of battle). dnd combat is not supposed to be realistic. It's supposed to be fantasy. Also, as a side note, there are plenty of modules and adventures published specificly for people like you who dont have time. Personally, I highly recommend Dungeon magazine. Most of said adventures are self-contained, and have sidebars detailing any new feats or spells they might use, as well as detailed tactical information for combats. ps: Use the enter key. It is your friend. pps: and with 8 PCs I agree, you should get one of them to be a Co-DM who is more rules-savy and cares about the game mechanics.
necrom99 09-30-06, 04:53 PM	We've instituted a rule where the person up in their turn of combat has ~20 seconds to tell me what he is doing or you lose your turn. (The pc knows well in advance when he's up in the round during combat.) This goes for me as well. If the group decides they need to rethink their strategy, I'll allow some time for that. But not too much time. I've got 8 pc's and I need to do something to speed up combat and keep the flow going. (I played in a group for about 15 years that had 8-16 people playing every week and we had to do something like this to keep the combat flowing and not bog down) I agree with you 100%!!! but i say it's 6 seconds in my game and not 20 because 6 is a round, but i stop counting down as soon as they start saying what there doing..... As far as it being too rules heavy, I happen to have a photo-graphic memory, so once i've read a rule i can generally remember it______and if i'm not sure exactly about it, then i can at least remember which book and where so it doesnt take long. the rules in D&D are standardized....everything works pretty much the same, so if something sounds completely outta left field it usually is. there's a method to the rules and understanding that leads to understanding the rules better.
BW0222 10-01-06, 11:47 AM	Andron, By varient rules, I'm talking about new feats, special powers granted by prestige classes, spells, etc... I really don't want to penalize a player for buying and wanting to use stuff out of a book I haven't read yet. Honestly, ban them. Non-core (PHP, MM, DMG) stuff causes more rules arguements because they haven't been play tested to the level of the core books. Maybe the realism is what gets me. If I wanted "realistic" fights, I'd join a recreation group, or play miniature battles. Good or bad, that is the way 3E is. I also don't like the slow down. Three combats a night is about the maximum and it the idea of large dungeon crawls is now virtually a thing of the past. For quite a long time, I wasn't convinced that the "realism" was worth the extra time. However, I went back to 1E a few times and it was really painful. Combat was quicker, but it seems so unreal. No real concept of position, movement, tactics, etc. Just rapid exchanges of dice rolling. I'm just trying to figure out how to get the combat down to the most basic elements, still allow the feats, and make it fast. I don't think that is possible by messing with the rules. Any rule could potentially save time (if used correctly) or waste time (if used inappropriately). Grappling can be a big waste of time... or the PCs can grapple an enemy wizard and end the combat a half hour early. I think you need to look at other ways... It seems that almost all the feats are combat oriented. To me, combat is the most mundane part of the adventure. What I find more intresting is the story, plot, and intrigue that leads up to the combat. (And that's what I tailor my game towards.) I have players that enjoy the rp side more, or the combat side more, and a few enjoy both. I agree. As such, cut down on the number of combats. RPGA stuff typically runs 3 combats per 4 hours as do most "store" bought modules. Try running only one per four hours or one every other session. Give more experience for non-combat encounters. I try to include everything every time we meet, but when the combat comes, everything just grinds to a halt. 3E combat is a game within a game. It switches from very free thinking to very strict system of rules governing every action. Going into initiative is the most abrupt thing I've seen. It plays more like a turn-based strategy game. It is still fun. It is a much more abrupt mind-set than in 1E or 2E. There is nothing wrong with it -- it is fun in a turn-based strategy kind of way. I think the key is realizing that it is what it is. Don't try to change the nature of the beast. The numbers given for combat rounds is great, if everyone pays attention and know all the rules. But in all practicality, that just doesn't happen. It'd be great if it did happen that way, though. I play with several groups -- and lots of RPGA stuff. If everyone knows the rules, the game typically runs really smooth. If no one knows the rules (except me as a DM), things usually run smooth... since they just take my word for it and it is more of a 'walk through'. Folks don't know any better so the declare an action and stick with it. Like driving on the road... the issue typically comes up when you only partially know the rules. You know that something exists, that some action/tactic can work, but you haven't used it enough to know what the effects are in different situations ... and you don't have an experienced DM who knows the rules and can explain them to you quickly. I find that my players wouldn't even think about what they were going to do next until it was their turn and then try to figure out what to do. The 20 second rule came about in the hopes of spurring the players into thinking about what they are doing before it became their turn. I actually have a few players that will roll the to hit and damage dice when they are on deck, next on the initiative order, and tell me what they are doing and what they rolled when I call out their name. Those are different issues. Skipping folks' initiatives is rarely a good idea to save time. It typically just puts the party in the soup and forces lots of extra rounds of initiative to get them out. Combat typically gets shorter when one side quickly overwhelms the other. Kind of like chess. A web spell which catches half the bad guys and allows the party to gang-up on the others -- dropping them quickly. A silence on the enemy spellcaster. Remembering to tossing oil on the troll, etc. Like I said earlier, time is precious. I do not have the time to read everything, create a story,etc... and do everything outside the game that needs to be done. (Family, work, etc...) I need to maximize my time I get to prepare for the game. (Which pretty much entails creating NPCs, encounters, treasure, maps, etc...a back story, making sure all the plot that is out there makes sense and can still be all tied together when all is said and done. You are kind of in the "catch 22" phase. Not enough time to learn to do it correctly and yet not enough time to not do it correctly. Maybe I should just get a player/co-DM to help me for the combat, that might help. I'd recommend getting an experienced DM to come in and just run the group through a series of set combat encounters. Treat it like a learning experience. Do stop and have him explain rulings. Movement, AoOs, attacks, various feats, spells, etc. For making the rule up as I go along. It works and hasn't caused any issue. If a player researches it and my ruling and the "offical" rule are different I do what alecthemad mentioned if the offical rule was in their favor. I always write down whatever rule I make up on the spot. I guess the nice thing is is that my players really don't read the rules that really don't pertain to their character abilities. And whatever ruling goes for the players goes for me too. Fair enough. Just keep in mind that most combat rules are really well balanced. Most 'this is broken' arguements which I hear from core spells and classes... come down to not following the rules about the ability strictly. You can't summon rhinos in the air and have them drop on enemies, you can't cast web in an open field, you can't magic missile a rope which someone is climbing on, etc. My combat speed-up tips. Get familiar with the rules When folks are familiar, it goes faster. Require copies of character sheets. Each time they level, they much provide you a copy of their character at the beginning of each session. This ensures that folks have their information filled out. You can also refer to them if the player is away. Require player aids. Premade spell lists which include range, duration, saves, etc. Pre-made sheets of summoned monster stats. Stats for animal companions. Stats for wildshaped forms. Get a second battle map. You can pre-draw sections of the dungeons. Dice rolling. Have enough so you aren't rolling dice after dice. If you have three attacks -- have three d20s. Roll d20s and damage at once. Don't roll d6 + d6 for your two-handed sword. Have two six-sided dice and roll them together. If you have trip or improved grab... roll two d20s and give both totals. Dice rolling - declarations Have the players call out their roll, pluses, and the total. "15 plus 8 equals 23" This helps ensure they are declaring their bonuses correctly and forces them to stop doing math in their head. Pre-rolling. Folks with large numbers of attack should pre-roll prior to their turn and just give the final numbers. The druid's bear, a trio of summoned wolves. Scap paper / Washable player sheet covers Write down pluses as you are buffed. Write down dice rolls during pre-rolling, etc. Delay When in doubt, delay. If you honestly can't think of what to do... delay. Recognize that at times there may not be anything you can do, or towards that end, that such actions are not necessary. Use D&D terms Get used to saying "I ready an action" rather then "When he does this, I do that..." Saves having to ask for clarifications. Keep lesser combats simple As a DM, keep the lesser combat simple. Don't template, add class levels, etc. to monsters. Also saves prep-time on stat-blocks. Avoid NPCs if you can. Look for large tactical advantages. Allow PCs the option of getting tactical advantages if they try. Surprise, finding the rear entrance into the bugbear caves so they can take the leader out alone, luring folks into an ambush, etc., etc. Don't penalize folks for smart thinking, just because the combat is too easy. Identify time-consuming tactics. Discourage time-wasting tactics when the fight is over or they honestly are not of any use. No point tossing up a darkness spell (preventing the PCs from reaching the lone bad guy) when the loan bad guy have 5 hp left. Rules at the table. Limit discussion time on rules. Say one change to make your case at the table. After that, challenges are written down and looked up at the end of the game and discussed at the beginning of the next session. Do go over rulings. Better everyone know the rule, rather than playing with the wrong ruling. It only takes a few minutes. It also gives players a chance to avoid non-sense stuff when they realize that it does take time away from their gaming. Work together and discuss tactics. Ensurage folks to work together, plan, discuss tactics, etc. Get familiar with each other's abilities. Good tactics make combat much shorter. Buffing fighters, invisiblity on the rogue, etc. Declare intentions, talk at the table. Come up with some common code words that folks use to ask for healing, declare that they are going to use an area spell again the bad guys, that they want flanking, etc. Don't try to surprise the party... spending lots of time figuring out the perfect fireball location only to have the barbarian charge into the middle of where it would have been. Breaks. Have a break before combat. Allow folks to finish drinks, go to the bathroom, etc. It also allows them to plan what they wish to do and even discuss it a bit.
Ut-Napishtim 10-01-06, 12:06 PM	You know, normally I would disagree and say the rules are okay. Last night though it seemed luck wasn't on my side. Even with my preparations it seemed like my players were determined to try off-the-wall actions that forced me to crack open the PHB. Normally though, no I don't find the rules to be that bad. Last night's game though - yeah, it was somewhat annoying. :twocents:
Andron 10-01-06, 12:42 PM	Thanks for the advice BW0222, there's some good stuff there. I've got a player to agree to co-DM with me to help combat move along. I guess the big thing is that we are still in the process of switching over from 2nd edition into 3.5 edition. Most of the rules I remember are still the 2nd edition rules. I really don't want to, but I guess for now I'll have to ban all things outside the core books. (DMG, PHB, and PHB2). Most of the group, 6 if you include me, only played 1st and/or 2nd edition. 3 never played before now. I originally wanted to stay with 2nd edition, since I was really familiar with those rules but was talked into updating. (For me, my first 16 years of playing was either 1st or 2nd edition. Then I just got back into it a few years ago when I stopped travelling on the road for work.) So, I'm not really complaining, just trying to figure out why combat takes so long now, and now I know. It's a combination of the fact that we all don't know these rules sets all too well and that the rules are now made to make more realistic battles. (For whatever that's worth.) I appreciate everyone's help/advice. I guess I just remember the good old days too much. Though I am still sticking to the ~20 second rule. (And may even lower the time limit a bit. As long as the player starts doing something, I'll give him a reasonable amount of time.) Plus where we play has WiFi, so I can direct link to an SRD now, that should help. I like the 3 combats per 4 hour session, I didn't know that. We're trying to fit in too much into 1 session. Dragon and Dungeon would be great, if not for the simple fact, like everything else for this game, was outragously priced for what it is. So I need to pick and choose which things to get. (As in I can't spend money on this hobby.)
CharlieRock 10-01-06, 01:24 PM	That was the genral feeling behind most groups here when they say "I play D&D. But, none of that third edition stuff" :(
aotrscommander 10-01-06, 01:51 PM	I've got a player to agree to co-DM with me to help combat move along. I guess the big thing is that we are still in the process of switching over from 2nd edition into 3.5 edition. So, I'm not really complaining, just trying to figure out why combat takes so long now, and now I know. It's a combination of the fact that we all don't know these rules sets all too well and that the rules are now made to make more realistic battles. (For whatever that's worth.) I appreciate everyone's help/advice. I guess I just remember the good old days too much. I like the 3 combats per 4 hour session, I didn't know that. We're trying to fit in too much into 1 session. Ah. Unfamilarity with the rules doesn't help! You will get faster with practise! Remember, also, that those of us who converted up from 2nd through 3.0 to 3.5 as it came out started with just the Core (because at the time we didn't have anything else!), so we had a more gradual adaption to new options and rules anyway. Our group usually manage about 1-2 combats in a 2-3 hours weekly session, and maybe 3-4 in a 6-hour one. Of course, this latter is assuming or two BBEG or extensive fights.
dizfactor 10-02-06, 01:10 AM	Our group usually manage about 1-2 combats in a 2-3 hours weekly session, and maybe 3-4 in a 6-hour one. Of course, this latter is assuming or two BBEG or extensive fights. Wow, my game is really combat-light. We have probably two combats per three sessions of four hours each on average, sometimes as many as one per session when it gets really ugly, sometimes as few as one every two or three sessions when it's a little quieter. My players are busy negotiating, planning, gathering supplies, planning, travelling, hiding, planning, sneaking around, gathering information, planning... Mind you, combat in my game has a tendency to be extremely deadly, largely due to the VP/WP system, so my players usually try to avoid combat when they can, and go to great lengths to control the circumstances of engagement. That's actually the bulk of "combat"-oriented activity in my games - trying to outthink and outmaneuver enemies.
aotrscommander 10-02-06, 07:06 AM	Wow, my game is really combat-light. We have probably two combats per three sessions of four hours each on average, sometimes as many as one per session when it gets really ugly, sometimes as few as one every two or three sessions when it's a little quieter. My players are busy negotiating, planning, gathering supplies, planning, travelling, hiding, planning, sneaking around, gathering information, planning... Mind you, combat in my game has a tendency to be extremely deadly, largely due to the VP/WP system, so my players usually try to avoid combat when they can, and go to great lengths to control the circumstances of engagement. That's actually the bulk of "combat"-oriented activity in my games - trying to outthink and outmaneuver enemies. Well, my numbers for the weekly session assume travelling or a dungeon crawl; we do have sessions, planning/investigating and so on with no combat. I was giving an example really of what we can do if we're going flat out. Our 6-ish hour sessions are a series of self-contained adventurers more like episodes in a TV show or something (with the occasional two-parter!), and they only happen about 3-4 times a year; they are also different parties to our weekly ongoing campaign. Thus, it behooves the session should encapsulate a bit of everything. Also, we are mostly wargamers, so a fair emphasis is placed on combat, rather than stealth/negociation. Not to say it doesn't happen, but it's something that comes along more infrequently than, say, finding the BBEG and pummeling him to bloody/boney/metallic pieces.
LCD2YOU 10-02-06, 09:18 PM	I have a 10 second rule and unless there are circumstances beyond control going on, ringing phone, pizza guy, etc., I keep to it or the player is just "refocussing". As for spell casters, so what? I use what is called the "Rule of the Expert". Want to run a spell caster? Great. Know what spells you can cast, when you can cast them, what their effects are, etc. Oh yes, no PHB or whatever book you got the spell from until AFTER you decide to cast it and checks are made. Sound harsh? Maybe, but combat speeds along. The players, there are 6 of them, have the time when the other players and the DM are moving, rolling dice, casting spells, etc., to think about what they want to do. They can use the PHB or Complete XYZ when it is not their turn. What I have found is that combat is sped up. No, with 6 players and 10 seconds to make up their minds when it is time for them to announce what they are doing, it isn't that they have just under a minute. They have about 5 to 8 minutes inbetween their own turn. Even with 10 seconds to decide, they still have to actually move, roll dice, DCs have to be made and more. That is about 30 seconds to a minute each. With my explaining what's going on, my bad guys doing their thing, that's another 10 to 15 seconds each for the NPCs. A lot of NPCs/Bad Guys to watch out for? Well, as a DM, I have to keep them in my mind too. Also, as I said earlier, the extra time for each bad guy allows extra time for the players to see where everything is. Yes, it does introduce the "fog of war". Mistakes happen, on both sides. Nothing is clean and tidy generally. I like it and though they weren't happy with the 10 seconds before, now they barely take 2 seconds. As they know their characters much better, they're telling me what they're doing when I look at them. That means they are actually into the game and not worrying about it only when it's their turn. I think that makes the game go better and is more entertaining. I didn't say "fun" on purpose as being entertained doesn't always mean it's "fun". It could be bad, happy, terrible and more, but I think the key is entertainment, not "fun".
BW0222 10-03-06, 01:43 PM	Andron, >Thanks for the advice BW0222, No problem. >I really don't want to, but I guess for now I'll have to ban all >things outside the core books. (DMG, PHB, and PHB2). The game is fun with just the core rules. However, when new to 3E it has a lot of advantages -- cost savings, rules arguements, unfairness to those without those books, etc. >(For me, my first 16 years of playing was either 1st or 2nd >edition. Then I just got back into it a few years ago when I >stopped travelling on the road for work.) I stopped playing 1E during university. After that, it was 3E when I finally got back into it. I find it impossible to go back now. >It's a combination of the fact that we all don't know these >rules sets all too well and that the rules are now made to >make more realistic battles. (For whatever that's worth.) The later is the reason. There is honestly a minimum amount of time any combat can go based on the system. The former (and the other advice) merely keeps it from getting insanely longer. >Though I am still sticking to the ~20 second rule. (And may >even lower the time limit a bit. As long as the player starts >doing something, I'll give him a reasonable amount of time.) I can't stress how much that doesn't work. I've seen what happens. Player misses their turn, combat goes for stink, and they end up having to 'do it the hard way'. Lots of prolonged slogging, unnecessary injuries, etc. In most combats, I can tell if it is going to be short or long within the first two rounds. I can set-up encounters which I know will be long -- suprise, invisible foes appearing in the rear ranks, folks who summon packs of little monsters to overwhelm the party, a defense against a spell/tactic which I know the PCs use, archers in trees when the PCs don't have a lot of missile specialists, folks sundering weapons, etc. This effectively 'wastes' a PCs iniative and puts them 'in the soup'. They then spend time on defensive actions (healing, rushing back to help the casters, getting out of flank, trying to get up trees, etc.) and not killing bad guys. Effectively, one lost initative becomes two or three. Combat then becomes much longer. It is also especially bad on new players. They are new. They don't know the rules. It is especially frustrating and arbitrary to penalize them for playing classes which do require more time, or seeing the other players get p'd at them because they wasted their initative and the entire party suffered because of it. >Plus where we play has WiFi, so I can direct link to an SRD >now, that should help. I'll add... No computers at the table. Block views, take up space, and they are no faster than flipping through a book. >I like the 3 combats per 4 hour session, I didn't know that. >We're trying to fit in too much into 1 session. 3E is different. Combat honestly takes a minimum of a half-hour, likely average an hour, and I've seen ones go nearly four hours. Everything is geared to less combat than 1E. Experience rewards are based on about 8-10 combats per level. >Dragon and Dungeon would be great, if not for the simple >fact, like everything else for this game, was outragously >priced for what it is. So I need to pick and choose which >things to get. (As in I can't spend money on this hobby.) It is the cheapest hobby out there. Players need the PHB and some dice. DMs add the MM and DMG and a battlemap. Characters sheets are free. Modules you make yourself -- or are free from the internet. You honestly don't need all those books. You don't need dozens of figs -- I use dice for bad guys because you can number them. Compared to a single concert ticket, diner and a movie, or a month's DVD rentals, dance lessons, a night at the bar, etc... 16 hours of monthly gaming is a bargin.
ccerose 10-03-06, 02:09 PM	The 20 second rule might be a bit extreme. I use initiative cards and a one minute timer. If players have multiple attacks, I have them use different colored d20s for each one and roll them simultaneously. We use action points, so after any hits are determined, damage for all successful attacks are rolled simultaneously, again matching colored dice are used to differentiate each attack. Also, I have each of the special attacks written on its own index card. Need to know the rules for Bull Rush? Just grab the card and read it over. If a PC uses spells, psionics, or maneuvers, I have the players use cards to write down their known spells. Then they simply take out the cards representing the spells they have prepared. Once they use a spell, they can put the card away until its prepared again. For psionics, they can just mark off how many power points were expended. I use these free init cards and spell/psionic cards from The Other Game Company (http://theothergamecompany.com/stuff-cards.htm).
Andron 10-03-06, 03:01 PM	Well, I really need the laptop. All my books are PDFs. I do not own a hardcopy of any book. Besides all my work for the game is also done on the laptop. But the advice helps...I really appreciate it, again. I meant that I really can't spend any more money than I have on the game. Got the battlemat- though we need a new one alerady. (The washable markers I bought weren't really washable), One player bought a HUGE amount of minis on ebay for use, and I have PDFs of the books I need. (Money's going into the house now so the neighborhood kids stop thinking it is the local haunted house. I feel like the Tom Hanks in The Money Pit...) I'm using a lot of the stuff from TOGC, it helps out greatly in planning out combat for my "monsters" The 20 rule is only for them to actually start doing something. If there is a real question or whatever, they get the time they need. It was just getting to the point where some players were not paying attention because of the long spans of time between their actions.
Ryngard 10-03-06, 03:13 PM	It isn't the fault of the game. 1) You don't HAVE to use the supplementary rules. There is nothing wrong for WotC to produce new and interesting sourcebooks. My group eats up each new book and we slowly incorporate its contents to the game to no ill effect. 2) I am not saying that you are doing something wrong, but the speed of the game and how quickly you process skills, feats, and misc options is on your shoulders, not the game. Any time combat slows for us is because the group attempts to be tactical. You don't have to use options like Sunder and Overrun and Grapple. Just roll your attack and if you hit roll your damage. Bam, 10 second combat per person. :) See it all depends on what you DO with the rules that counts.
Ryngard 10-03-06, 03:15 PM	Andron, It is the cheapest hobby out there. Players need the PHB and some dice. DMs add the MM and DMG and a battlemap. Characters sheets are free. Modules you make yourself -- or are free from the internet. You honestly don't need all those books. You don't need dozens of figs -- I use dice for bad guys because you can number them. Compared to a single concert ticket, diner and a movie, or a month's DVD rentals, dance lessons, a night at the bar, etc... 16 hours of monthly gaming is a bargin. Hear hear! :)
ccerose 10-03-06, 03:18 PM	No computers at the table. Block views, take up space, and they are no faster than flipping through a book. I disagree with this one. I always have the SRD loaded on my PC during games. I have separate windows open for monsters, spells, feats, etc. so I can quickly find a rule. My notebook doubles as a DM screen. I also have various music files and sound effects that I have hot-keyed for battle sequences, traveling, tavern, etc.
mightymouse1107 10-03-06, 04:33 PM	I have to second (or third or fourth, whatever we're on) all the posts suggesting you just ban the non-core books from your game. My group has done so, except the Spell Compendium. (no one wants to spend the money, and we all have great fun making up our own feats, magic items, and rules variations.) Whether that is your reasoning, or you just want a simpler game, your easiest course is just going to be the elimination of non-core materials. (Or selective use of non-core, such as the Spell Compendium or Psionics Handbook.) That said, I don't blame anyone who uses the non-core material. Some might not have the time to make their own materials, some might not have a group that is interested in doing so (and its no fun being the only one supplying new materials), and some might just really think WotC is doing a great job with the new material. All valid reasons. I do have one tangential remark. I have played many different types of RPG's over the years, including GURPS and Shadowrun (and a few other less popular modules not worth mentioning). For DND I have played 1ed, 2ed, 3ed, and what might be called 3.25ed (the selective merging of some 3.5 rules into the 3.0 games my group was running.) While I do find DnD to be less realistic in its combat, I have to agree with those that say the game mechanics make combat a ton of fun. What I disagree with is the assertion that DnD is somehow inherently more of a rollplaying sysem and thus an inferior role-playing system to others. Rollplaying system is just a matter of preference. Some people like d20, some like dice pools, and some like point systems. This has nothing to do with superiority and inferiority, it is merely a matter of aesthetic preference. As far as role-playing goes, there is no substitute for a good player and good DM/GM. Systems don't destroy that, and part of the reason for a rule 0 in any group is to preserve the ability to role-play if one runs into a situation where the rules system has become a hinderance. Role-playing is far less a function of the particular system used, and far more a function of the participants.
Andron 10-03-06, 04:46 PM	[EDIT: Masking is against the CoC. Keep it clean] Sorry WizO_Autumn, didn't mean to break any CoC rule.
_plucky 10-03-06, 05:54 PM	>My recommendation... if a player takes more than X seconds to declare what they are going to do... just rule that they are delaying. Allow them to pop back into initiative when they finally look up something or otherwise make their decision. This way you don't dramatically increase the length of the combat by forcing missing of initiatives. I do like this "mid-ground". Cut down the time from 20 seconds to 6-10 seconds to decide, and if they can't, they just move right down the initiative order until they DO decide to go. Delay as the default action. As for "spellcasters need more time", and "taking 2 minutes to place a fireball" type of arguments, as one of the casters in the group (yes, I'm one of Andron's players ;)) that's bunk. No player should take that long to figure out which spell they are going to cast, where they're going to cast it, etc. I'm on the "know your spells" side of things. This is the first 3.5 campaign I've played in (though spells are generally similar to 1st and 2nd in effect, so I have that advantage over NEW players), but I do keep a handy printout of the spells I CAN cast nearby, and it's real easy to decide what to cast within in the time I have (if not the time BETWEEN turns). Besides, in combat, you don't HAVE 30 seconds to decide where to place your fireball, unless you delay 5 rounds to figure it out. >Require copies of character sheets. We did just start doing that (first time, as we just hit 6th level). >Dice rolling *sigh* Something that WOULD speed up our game is if Ranger boy didn't lose his dice so he and his father had to share a set last game! >Work together and discuss tactics This one is another problem in our group, but at least for IN GAME reasons. In Game we represent a group that, well, doesn't work well together :) We are much lighter on combat than Andron lets on (I think our last game had 2 combats, which is generally the upper end for us. Rare cases have more (smaller) combats, or one LARGER one). Still, any combat that takes more than 30 minutes does eat a major chunk of a 4 hour session. I think finding the proper balance is important, while sometimes difficult. Laptops at the table? Not a problem for some people... A big problem for others. One player last weekend got lost in his laptop... We should have skipped his turn in initiative, or 'delayed' him... Besides, the table is big enough for a couple laptops (and a laptop in lieu of a stack of books CAN take up LESS space). Of course, he's probably the one person who would be most upset if we told him to NOT use a laptop there... -plucky
Andron 10-04-06, 04:54 PM	A LARGE table... think Batman dinner scene in the first movie. ;) So far, it seems that the group is willing to stick with just the core books. This is fine becuase I really don't think we are going beyond that anyway. I'm using the different environmental books and campaign books (Stormwrack, Heroes of Horror, etc...) for ideas. We've also found a 2 page cheat sheet that really cuts down to the core basics for combat. (Which I think is all that our group are really interested in.) We'll go with the 10 second count once your name is called for your turn in combat, if you don't answer then your action is delayed. Seems fair enough and doesn't need to be debated. I still think the combat rules have gotten way too complicated, but to each his own. Yes, its nice to have representations of characters and monsters on a board and be able to follow a combat sequence and plot out a course of action, etc... I'm just afraid that the game has turned more into a miniatures strategy battle game instead of a Fantasy ROLE playing game. It's not a knock on all the suppliments or wargammers, I just think it is way over thought and better used for a miniatures battle game. I was never drawn to this particular game for the combat. I always loved the fantastical worlds that we played in and the creatures, mysteries, and ancient ruins, etc... that we encountered. (I always played the spellcaster who was in the background figuring out the story and what we needed to do to solve the mystery, then lending a hand to get the job done.) But from reading the boards it looks like most people are just interested in min/maxing their characters for combat. I'm not say ALL people but there are whole thread and sections dedicated to this. I think I got off the subject, oh well. Needless to say, I think we found a way to simplify it to what will make all of us happy in the group and that is all that really counts. We have fun. We get together and roll some dice. That's all that really matters.