Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 firebelly Jun 20, 2009 4:07:57	does anyone else have similar experiences? As a rule the combats are long, as in lots of rounds. Even if I use my dailies and encounter powers I am still doing most my attacks with my at wills. As there are only two, this is getting boring fast.
#2 lugubrious Jun 20, 2009 4:43:56	Halve the HP of all monsters and double their damage. Fights are faster, harder, and more exciting. Fighting a big group or a solo monster (especially a high-HP one) can easily turn into a boring at-will slugfest after about five rounds, when your damage output goes down the tubes yet the monster is only barely bloodied.
#3 Overmind69 Jun 20, 2009 4:49:38	It's usually only boring in the early levels fighting a solo. Good DM's make sure to use plenty of minions and interesting terrain to keep the fights interesting when it's just down to at-wills. Eventually the characters have plenty of items and powers to limit at-will usage.
#4 Psikerlord Jun 20, 2009 4:52:21	I like 10 round plus combats... in 3.5 it was all over in two rounds. At least in 4e there is tension, a string of bad luck and your party can be in deep trouble.
#5 CraggleRock Jun 20, 2009 7:53:53	I'd recommend a read of Stalker0's Anti-Grind thread on ENWorld here, which is a great source of information, but a very quick breakdown of some of the advice: don't use higher level solos, use equal levels with interesting terrain features; don't overly use brute and other high HP types; occasionally use focused attacks, even if it means taking OA's and risking death; use minions for aid others. However, that really doesn't do the full posting justice, so I highly recommend a read through Stalker0's advice.
#6 stormknight Jun 20, 2009 8:41:36	Halve the HP of all monsters and double their damage. Fights are faster, harder, and more exciting. Fighting a big group or a solo monster (especially a high-HP one) can easily turn into a boring at-will slugfest after about five rounds, when your damage output goes down the tubes yet the monster is only barely bloodied. A suggestion I saw on the boards that has been working well for me is to halve monster's HP and build encounters as if monsters were 1 level lower (or, as if the party was 1 level higher gives almost the same effect). You have about 75% of the monster HP, with more offense and more creatures on the field to spice things up. I've also taken to adding 1 damage die to all the damage values for solos - they have too little offense as is. More damage dice might be needed at higher levels. Just had a fight with a hydra and grimlock minions last night. While the fighter managed to pin the hydra in a position where it couldn't easily get away, it shredded through her HP fast, and nearly took her down twice (the cleric heals really well however). Nice challenging fight, was over in around half an hour.
#7 max422 Jun 20, 2009 8:52:33	I always felt the terrain environment contributes lot to the combat. Multiple levels seems to add a lot of interest. Fight on a bridge, ledges, ladders, or catwalks. Whatever you can do to bring physics into the combat seems to help.
#8 hong_kong_phooey Jun 20, 2009 9:22:51	So, the game, as written, produces long and boring combats? That have to be mitigated through houserules and/or tweaking the monsters? I don't know if I would want to waste my time and money on that...
#9 mobar2008 Jun 20, 2009 9:25:25	So, the game, as written, produces long and boring combats? That have to be mitigated through houserules and/or tweaking the monsters? I don't know if I would want to waste my time and money on that... Not that I've found. I've had some pretty exciting combats with fourth.
#10 nowiwantmydmg Jun 20, 2009 9:48:36	So, the game, as written, produces long and boring combats? That have to be mitigated through houserules and/or tweaking the monsters? I don't know if I would want to waste my time and money on that... That's only true for DMs who aren't used to(or simply aren't good at) the new methods. Simply put terrain, movement and tactics greatly increase the speed of combat. The days of a monster/player staying in place and mindlessly hacking away are over. If the monsters aren't acting as a team and using their powers and any traps or terrain features to maximum effect you're doing it wrong. Likewise for the players. Every combat so far has been 1 hour or less, and if my players are bored it sure doesn't show.
#11 GhostStepper Jun 20, 2009 10:02:40	So, the game, as written, produces long and boring combats? That have to be mitigated through houserules and/or tweaking the monsters? I don't know if I would want to waste my time and money on that... My experience has been the 90% of the time combats are much more tactical and interesting than they used to be (when my current groups started 3.5). The problem seems to be running solos above the party's level. If it isn't done right it can become a grind. In any case, I've at least found constructing fun encounters to be way easier than in 3E. There, i had to completely throw the encounter building rules out the window in order to make things work properly.
#12 visanidethdm Jun 20, 2009 10:03:24	So, the game, as written, produces long and boring combats? That have to be mitigated through houserules and/or tweaking the monsters? I don't know if I would want to waste my time and money on that... Considering I have to remind 30+ old people that D&D is still a roleplaying game because they're damn eager to start combat at all times like little schoolgirls, I would say the opposite. Combat in 4e is probably too fun. Sometimes I feel my players should be more scared and less excited when I whip out a new monster.
#13 GhostStepper Jun 20, 2009 10:13:03	Considering I have to remind 30+ old people that D&D is still a roleplaying game because they're damn eager to start combat at all times like little schoolgirls, I would say the opposite. Combat in 4e is probably too fun. Sometimes I feel my players should be more scared and less excited when I whip out a new monster. Do like i unwisely did last session and daze the whole party for a 2 hour long combat with a purple dragon. That will curb their excitement. ;)
#14 quiterjon_dup Jun 20, 2009 10:33:59	So, the game, as written, produces long and boring combats? That have to be mitigated through houserules and/or tweaking the monsters? I don't know if I would want to waste my time and money on that... It's a couple of factors contributing. 1. Players not focusing attacks 2. Dms still in the older edition mindset of encounter design Look at the concept of halving creature hp and doubling damage. Orc Beserker:AC15 33hp 2d12+10 33damage is fairly easy to accomplish with just 2 at-wills, you throw in an encounter/daily power and this houseruled creature is dieing in droves. It ends up being just 1-2 rounds of combat again, encounter power AoE from controller, at-wills from the rest = all dead. 4E is about the group. Some find that real hard to understand.
#15 Vilnias_Nastavnik Jun 20, 2009 10:38:11	I agree with the other posters, add traps and terrain to make it more challenging. A perfect example is (WARNING SPOILER ALERT) in Scepter Tower of Spellguard, there is a room with a water trap that is activated by various pressure plates WHILE you are fighting off some serious skeleton warriors. It was stressful, challenging and almost killed them, especially since one of the doors closed with a party member on the outside listening to the fight while trying to undo the trap from the outside. (he was the only one with Thievery skills worth enough to reverse the trap) The DMG has a ton of info on how to spice things up.
#16 max422 Jun 20, 2009 11:01:19	I agree with the other posters, add traps and terrain to make it more challenging. A perfect example is (WARNING SPOILER ALERT) in Scepter Tower of Spellguard, there is a room with a water trap that is activated by various pressure plates WHILE you are fighting off some serious skeleton warriors. It was stressful, challenging and almost killed them, especially since one of the doors closed with a party member on the outside listening to the fight while trying to undo the trap from the outside. (he was the only one with Thievery skills worth enough to reverse the trap) The DMG has a ton of info on how to spice things up. I find physics work really well. Years ago I ran a game scenario with a narrow tower. One floor of the tower contained a soundless/invisibility level --anyone walking into the one room became invisible after they crossed the plane of the doorway. Objects in the room were visible (rugs, chairs, tapestries, etc.), just not people or their possessions. There was no audio at all. Total silence. The 4 person party came into the room piecemeal, with the thief entering a bit earlier than the rest. He ended up looking for a secret door behind one of the tapestries (there wasn't one). He didn't know there was an assassin on the level who could see the lump moving along the wall... of course he got stabbed, and the party had to figure out what happened when they finally got there. Anyway, the idea seemed good when I conceived it, but it really blossomed in play. It was a little scary because there were times I thought it would spiral out of control. I eventually had people in different rooms of my house while I ran room-to-room asking each "what they were doing now". --It wasn't all combat, it was really more of problem-solving rescue experience for everyone (including me). But everyone really played that room. That's an extreme case of physics, but an unusual environment can make the drama almost all by itself.
#17 Overmind69 Jun 20, 2009 12:38:11	So, the game, as written, produces long and boring combats? That have to be mitigated through houserules and/or tweaking the monsters? I don't know if I would want to waste my time and money on that... I don't find that to be the case unless it's a solo with a ton of HP, and like I said, only in the first couple levels.
#18 Nibelung_ajr Jun 20, 2009 14:14:50	Halve the HP of all monsters and double their damage. Fights are faster, harder, and more exciting. Fighting a big group or a solo monster (especially a high-HP one) can easily turn into a boring at-will slugfest after about five rounds, when your damage output goes down the tubes yet the monster is only barely bloodied. Strange, by my personal experience, usually I start using my at-wills long before all my encounter powers are gone. Sure, if you have any encounter power "lots of damage, no effect", there's no reason to not start the fight with it instead of any at-will "small damage, no effect". It's just that all groups I ever played loved the "small damage, small effect" at-will, and "medium damage, great effect" encounter. Dailies are 50-50. Sometimes my fighter rushes ahead and footwork lure one enemy, so the group can gang it, or sometimes i abdicate my 2w encounter for a cleave, to kill an adjacent minion and avoid flank. Avoid the pure damage powers, and you can see one single character turn totally shifting the actual situation, and forcing everyone to rethink tactics. If your group is all "damage, damage, damage", and combat by itself isn't much tactical (charge, full attack, full attack, full attack, rinse and repeat), then you can use that house rule to make thing more 3.5-esque.
#19 lugubrious Jun 20, 2009 15:21:52	Strange, by my personal experience, usually I start using my at-wills long before all my encounter powers are gone. Sure, if you have any encounter power "lots of damage, no effect", there's no reason to not start the fight with it instead of any at-will "small damage, no effect". It's just that all groups I ever played loved the "small damage, small effect" at-will, and "medium damage, great effect" encounter. Dailies are 50-50. Sometimes my fighter rushes ahead and footwork lure one enemy, so the group can gang it, or sometimes i abdicate my 2w encounter for a cleave, to kill an adjacent minion and avoid flank. Avoid the pure damage powers, and you can see one single character turn totally shifting the actual situation, and forcing everyone to rethink tactics. If your group is all "damage, damage, damage", and combat by itself isn't much tactical (charge, full attack, full attack, full attack, rinse and repeat), then you can use that house rule to make thing more 3.5-esque. Yes, running out of encounter powers definitely means I don't play tactically. It absolutely couldn't mean that solo soldiers and brutes have inordinate amounts of HP and do laughable damage, which turns them into boring meatbags even before you're out of encounters and dailies.
#20 firebelly Jun 20, 2009 15:42:29	I will have a read of the EN Thread. However I am not the DM, and the DM is very keen to run the module as written; Its the series that includes the 7 pillars halls (where we currently are) We turned 6th level last level. As far as I can tell we are a 'bit' underpowered with regards to magic items. I got a +2 staff last session but that was after an email round in the group discussing the general lack of magic items and the issue of not hitting very often. So it felt as if the staff wasn't in the module....probably a good indicator that the DM is a little concerned too and willing to help. 'All' the fights have been tough and long. But boring because of reasons stated. The monsters have mainly been melee types, or a large melee type supported by artillery. Like us getting ambushed last session, one warden construct type +2 theifling missile throwers from ledges. The thieflings were easy to take down, the large melee type took for ever. Which has been a common theme in a lot of the fights, take down the easy targets first, reduce the damage coming in as fast as possible then concentrate on the big melee types. So we have learned to gang up on the enemy, and the enemy on occasion gang up on one of us. To the point that the dwarf fighter (often the first through the door) is maybe becoming a little head shy. The module has some terrain in it but I don't find that consistent in all fights. Often the terrain seems to be there to aid the enemy, and most of the time its a question of negating their advantage rather than being able to use it ourselves. Like the last fight, the ambush, clearing the ledges of the thieflings didn't really give us lots of advantage on the big warden. At least three of the group still 'needed' to be toe to toe with him (rogue, warlord, fighter), the other two (Wizard (me), cleric) could do stuff at range but to be fair the room was large enough to do this without being on the ledges and the clerics powers seem rather short range so I think she preferred to be closer to the action then the ledge allowed anyways. I find we end up using a lot of resources in one fight, often our melee types are out of healing surges at the end and most of us are out of dailies, with maybe one encounter power left that wasn't quite appropriate for the situation.
#21 undrave Jun 20, 2009 16:10:51	The published modules are pretty stingy when it comes to items, and a lot of them stinks (Shield of Bashing?! REALLY?!). The revised KotS for exemple has more loot (and better ones) in it.
#22 Nibelung_ajr Jun 20, 2009 18:55:34	Yes, running out of encounter powers definitely means I don't play tactically. It absolutely couldn't mean that solo soldiers and brutes have inordinate amounts of HP and do laughable damage, which turns them into boring meatbags even before you're out of encounters and dailies. Brutes can go down in 2 rounds of concentrated fire because everyone hits. Soldiers should be more rare exactly because they have superior defenses. Solos and Elites are special cases. Level-equivalent arent much different, since they can be ganged up and beaten. High-level suffer from the attack/defense gap between levels, and usually ends on a long fight when nobody hits often, but the supermonster have 5 guys on his tail, and THEN the fight can end in full attack, full attack, full attack after he is surrounded. My point is: One single combination isnt enough to house rule every monster after this. Only high-level elite/solos, or elite/solo soldier are really hard to beat and finishes on a grind. All other monster types are good enough the way they are by the rules.
#23 firebelly Jun 20, 2009 19:49:03	I'm not so sure its only with elite/ solos/ soldiers. Fight before the ambush: One main boss type, one of those evil deep dwarves, weilding a flaming maul, wearing black plate armor. I took him for a melee type, not that interested really if he is solo or elite or both or soldier, he had a mountain of hit points and pretty good AC; most of us needed 14 or higher to hit. There were also three other, similar but obviously lesser melee type dwarves and a spell caster dwarf. The spell caster went down early, more luck than good management. Our dwarf ran in, had misheard the descriptions and thought he was wailing on the big boss type. (He is the only one in the group that does not subscribe to killing the lesser enemies before the boss types) As he damaged the spellcaster we all targeted the same dwarf like a pack of shark, I don't think he even got one spell off. From then on the fight ground to a halt. Sure there were some pushing, sliding and pulling going on, but that soon stopped. I think the score was one-one for sliding/ pushing people into the fire places. Most of it was just a slug fest, with the same at wills used over and over again. I was keeping some stuff in reserve as I was figuring that the bad guys would be reinforced through an other set of obvious looking double doors. sure enough it happened at about the time it seemed we were starting to win. Four orcs and an ogre. Relatively easy to hit but each had a stack of hit points, making the fight last sooo much longer. I used my expeditious retreat (to get out of their way and get some party members between me and them) after casting icy terrain on the new group. It slowed them down somewhat, but soon the two groups of enemy were joined together and we were back to slugging it out with at wills. Fun? only from a point of view that the battle did swing several times back into favour of the bad guys, and that the outcome did not look certain for a long time. However options wise it is boring...at wills are not very inspiring to play over and over again... Actually just after the new group of enemy appeared I cast flaming sphere, but then all you do it hit with that over and over again...others in the group do not have sustainable powers and find themselves falling back on their at wills a little more. Anyone put any houserules in play that let you 'recharge' encounter or even daily powers during an encounter? Most the group find their dailies cool but are really disappointed when they miss with them. You don't need to be that unlucky to miss with both your dailies in one session. It seems the DM has the most fun these days. He has new monsters to play with every week that have cool new abilities/ powers each time. I am stuck with the same 2/ 3 powers as 80-90% of my attacks for ever.
#24 Nibelung_ajr Jun 20, 2009 20:31:18	I took him for a melee type, not that interested really if he is solo or elite or both or soldier, he had a mountain of hit points and pretty good AC; most of us needed 14 or higher to hit. That is exactly the situation that i said as elite/solo/soldier. Soldiers have great AC and lots of HP, but do crappy damage. Usually, same level monsters you can hit on a 11 if you start with 16 on your primary attack ability. Requiring a 14 is something i call "good defenses".
#25 firebelly Jun 21, 2009 4:01:21	That is exactly the situation that i said as elite/solo/soldier. Soldiers have great AC and lots of HP, but do crappy damage. Usually, same level monsters you can hit on a 11 if you start with 16 on your primary attack ability. Requiring a 14 is something i call "good defenses". Not to nitpick but if there was a elite/solo/ soldier (if the black plate flaming maul wielding evil dwarf was one). There were nine other enemies there, none of them minions. Each took a fair number of rounds to beat down. I still don't think its the single monster that is the problem, heck I have yet to meet a monster all by itself in 4th. The issue is that the combats degenerate in whacking monsters with a fairly limited number of powers. This is boring. I reckon that even if encounters were shorter we'd just have more of them in a day but with only a slight increase of variation due to being able to cast the same encounter powers more often. At 6th I only have 2 attacking encounter powers. Drop the number of rounds from about 20 to 10 per encounter and I will still roughly use my at wills about 80% of the time. Doubling damage output of monsters but halving their HPs seems risky. Has anyone seen that by taking this suggestion you could get even more issues with parties running into bad luck streaks? The one redeeming feature of the long encounters is that the group has time to pull out of the bad luck streak. Will this suggestion cause more combats (of 'equivalent' levels) to hit the boundaries? i.e. the fights will be either real easy or a TPK due to the pure randomness of the d20?
#26 CraggleRock Jun 21, 2009 4:45:34	Not to nitpick but if there was a elite/solo/ soldier (if the black plate flaming maul wielding evil dwarf was one). There were nine other enemies there, none of them minions. Each took a fair number of rounds to beat down. I still don't think its the single monster that is the problem, heck I have yet to meet a monster all by itself in 4th. The issue is that the combats degenerate in whacking monsters with a fairly limited number of powers. This is boring. I reckon that even if encounters were shorter we'd just have more of them in a day but with only a slight increase of variation due to being able to cast the same encounter powers more often. At 6th I only have 2 attacking encounter powers. Drop the number of rounds from about 20 to 10 per encounter and I will still roughly use my at wills about 80% of the time. Doubling damage output of monsters but halving their HPs seems risky. Has anyone seen that by taking this suggestion you could get even more issues with parties running into bad luck streaks? The one redeeming feature of the long encounters is that the group has time to pull out of the bad luck streak. Will this suggestion cause more combats (of 'equivalent' levels) to hit the boundaries? i.e. the fights will be either real easy or a TPK due to the pure randomness of the d20? Having interactive terrain can help alleviate a bit of the "chore" of being reduced to simply At-Will options (which does tend to happen on occasion and does tend to turn the combat into a bit of a drag if it goes on). But if the options are between At-Wills, or "pulling down that bookcase on this groups", or "kicking this wheeled ladder towards that guy with the bow"... things can be improved somewhat.
#27 exogent Jun 21, 2009 4:50:38	Players too must use some inspiration. Standing there hitting something without considering tactics to get the best use of the environment and some modicum of synergy with the party's respective powers is, I'm afraid, the most common reason people complain that things are dull. It's not a video game. you have to put something in to get something out. Mix up your powers, think of fun ways that your powers combine with those of other party members; use the environment to your advantage. Even wise use of movement and minor action can add a lot of spice. At level six you should have two encounter powers, two daily powers and two utilities, three or more feats to play with in addition to class features and your at-will powers. A halfway decent DM should be adding in different monsters types, areas of different shapes, sizes and elevations and terrains. To my mind that's as sufficiently broad array of variable factors to allow an astonishing amount of possibilities for fun things to do. You are NEVER "just limited to at-wills"; the biggest limitation for any player is his or her own lack of creativity.
#28 Nibelung_ajr Jun 21, 2009 9:07:50	Drop the number of rounds from about 20 to 10 per encounter and I will still roughly use my at wills about 80% of the time. I think i found where we disagree. I'm playing 4e for almost 1 year, and the longest fight I ever had was 12 rounds, against a unique solo soldier N+3. All my other fights ends in 6~8 rounds, most of time. Some N and N-1 fights even finish in 4 rounds, before we expend all our encounters.
#29 Johnny_Angel Jun 21, 2009 9:27:18	Personally, I've found what can contribute to the bore-factor is the almost laughable damage that some of the monsters do. DM: "The dragon scores a critical hit!" Player: "Oh no.." DM: "That will be 16 damage." Player: "Is that all?" It can be somewhat difficult to motivate the PCs to move around if they don't feel as though they need to move around due to lack of danger. I have noticed that the DMs I play with (we've been playing 4E fairly regularly since it came out; we've had a campaign go from 1 to 30, etc, etc...a lot of time spent with the game) have learned a lot of things about the system, and they do a really good job of making things interesting. I know when we got toward the end of the first campaign we did, I was actually a little upset that it was over because I was having fun with it. However, there are still times when 4E just seems to really drag. Hitting the monsters hasn't been a problem for anyone other than the few warlock characters we've had; even before the expertise feat, we had no problem hitting; now many of the characters can roll single digits and still hit. What makes things feel slow is that monsters (this has been made a lot better with MM2, but the numbers of the game still need work IMO*) hit for laughable damage; meanwhile I'm doing more with an @will than the monster is doing with critical hits. Often times I'll be sitting there trying to figure out how many rounds it will take before the creature dies; I may consider using a second wind or asking for a healing surge from the party leader if somehow I'm actually in danger. *Speaking of MM2. Something really needs to be done to bring the MM1 creatures up to speed now. Last night we had an encounter with a sand dragon and a white dragon (not two encounters; one encounter with both...long story.) The sand dragon by itself was somewhat challenging; adding the white dragon really didn't seem to matter at all except it meant it took us longer to kill both creatures. The part collectively decided to gang up on the sand and ignore the white until the sand was dead. The difference in challenge from MM1 to MM2 is very noticeable.
#30 bleach Jun 21, 2009 11:08:47	Some questions first. How many people in your group? What are the breakdown of the classes? How many rounds of ombat does it take usually to beat an equal level monster (normal, elite and solo?) AS an aside, it usually makes more sense to open with your at-wills than to use your encounter power... EDIT 20 ROUNDS? Woah...there's something not right there...Even when I used a Level +5 solo soldier against my group, they only took 12 rounds...something is definitely off there...
#31 wrecan Jun 21, 2009 11:34:30	You might enjoy [post=17761178]How to Shorten Combat: A DM's Guide[/post]
#32 xanadu Jun 21, 2009 16:55:42	Personally, I've found what can contribute to the bore-factor is the almost laughable damage that some of the monsters do. DM: "The dragon scores a critical hit!" Player: "Oh no.." DM: "That will be 16 damage." Player: "Is that all?" I believe we have a winner here. People are kidding themselves if they yell "terrain" as if it is some magic elixer that can fix the Monster Manual.
#33 Johnny_Angel Jun 21, 2009 18:06:13	I believe we have a winner here. People are kidding themselves if they yell "terrain" as if it is some magic elixer that can fix the Monster Manual. In defense of 4E, terrain does help. Also, the math and the design of the MM2 monsters seem to provide a better challenge than the MM1 monsters in a lot of cases. Terrain does help. However that doesn't change that occasionally, as a DM, I've had to step back and give myself a reality check and ask myself if it seemed to the players like I was trying to TPK them with some of the setups I had for encounters. I don't think they'll ever forget the 'Rubix Room.' Sometimes I worry that using too much terrain can make it seem as though I'm intentionally trying to take a PC (or multiple PCs) down. It's a balancing act which can be tough for someone who is new to DMing 4E. At higher levels terrain starts to matter less though; the PCs generally start to become far more mobile than the monsters typically are; sometimes the terrain hinders the monsters more than it does the players. I have to give kudos to the design team for the sand dragon; they did a good job of keeping the same feel that the creature had in older editions, and it's one of the few solos so far which has managed to feel threatening while sitting on the player side of the table.
#34 GhostStepper Jun 21, 2009 18:54:05	I've found that terrain works best when both sides can take advantage of it to screw their opponent over. Its tempting to make hazardous terrain that is dangerous to the PCs but trivial to the monsters (lava monsters in a room full of laval) but its usually more rewarding if the players can use tactics to utilized the terrain against the monsters as readily as the monsters use it against them.
#35 Webster Jun 21, 2009 20:39:06	You could also try being more descriptive in your attacks. Player: "Kricklen jumps in front of Telena to protect her from the nasty beast. With a mighty roar, I yell "You stay away from her!" and swing. I rolled a 15." DM: The beast chuckles at you. "Better luck next time" as he swings a club at your head. (Rolls) It connects solidly for 5 points of damage and you're dazed until the end of his next turn." Much better than: Player: I shift to the square between the beast and Telena and attack. I rolled a 15." DM "You miss. It's now his turn and he attacks you and hits for 5 points of damage, and you're dazed until the end of his next turn." Both work, but the first is more engaging and interesting.
#36 Hocus-Smokus Jun 21, 2009 21:08:47	You could also try being more descriptive in your attacks. ^This. After running a few play-by-post games for a while now, I can definately attest to this making a difference. Usually, the player will give a wonderful description about their attack, then s-block the actual mechanics and die-rolls. If simply viewed, it looks very much like a novel describing a fight scene. Example: Kalan, finding himself surrounded by the vile beasts, unleashes a whirling attack of steel and blood. Those that survive his attack are thrown backwards from the furious assault and land flat of their backs. Mechanics Sweeping Whirlwind Encounter ✦ Martial,Weapon Standard Action - Close burst 1 Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons. Target: Each enemy in burst Attack: Strength vs. AC Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage, and you push the target a number of squares equal to your Wisdom modifier and it is knocked prone. Attack Rolls:---- Damage Rolls and Effects:----
#37 Johnny_Angel Jun 21, 2009 23:58:51	^This. After running a few play-by-post games for a while now, I can definately attest to this making a difference. Usually, the player will give a wonderful description about their attack, then s-block the actual mechanics and die-rolls. If simply viewed, it looks very much like a novel describing a fight scene. Example: Kalan, finding himself surrounded by the vile beasts, unleashes a whirling attack of steel and blood. Those that survive his attack are thrown backwards from the furious assault and land flat of their backs. Mechanics Sweeping Whirlwind Encounter ✦ Martial,Weapon Standard Action - Close burst 1 Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons. Target: Each enemy in burst Attack: Strength vs. AC Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage, and you push the target a number of squares equal to your Wisdom modifier and it is knocked prone. Attack Rolls:---- Damage Rolls and Effects:----
#38 firebelly Jun 22, 2009 0:35:55	Some questions first. How many people in your group? What are the breakdown of the classes? How many rounds of ombat does it take usually to beat an equal level monster (normal, elite and solo?) AS an aside, it usually makes more sense to open with your at-wills than to use your encounter power... EDIT 20 ROUNDS? Woah...there's something not right there...Even when I used a Level +5 solo soldier against my group, they only took 12 rounds...something is definitely off there... 1) 5 2) dwarf fighter, elven rogue, half elf warlord, halfling cleric, elven wizard 3) don't know about equivalent level. The mechanics are quite hidden, I 'know' the DM plays it close to the published modules (currently at 7 pillared halls as previously stated); but combats regularly last more than 10 rounds often 20 rounds. The fight in particularly quoted before I thought about 2 rounds per critter wasn't too bad. 10 critters about 20 rounds. None of the critters were 1HP minions. Which btw I have not seen one of them for a long time. Question: why does it make more sense to open with at wills in general? Whats the principle behind that one?
#39 quiterjon_dup Jun 22, 2009 1:15:22	Opening with at-wills helps to gauge defenses of the creatures, and normally it takes 2 rounds to get everyone into the 'proper' postions for combat.
#40 tourq Jun 22, 2009 5:00:49	I have not had too many problems with boring combats. I try to head this off before it becomes a problem: My NPCs don't always fight to the death. They often either surrender or flee, rather than face an obvious death. I like the idea of bad-azz NPCs doing increased damage and having fewer hit points. I won't hesitate to implement that if I ever need to. I say that terrain does help, but I usually build 3D terrain maps. Check them out at RoleplayingPro.com. The Gallery has pretty cool pictures. You could get some ideas from there.
#41 thegreaterbad Jun 22, 2009 5:54:03	For me, combat for combat's sake is always a grind. When I'm writing adventures I want every fight to mean something. A fight that might be boring if it's labeled "Fight in room B6" is much more interesting when they're trying to reclaim the Journal of the corrupt noble whose behind recent bad events. Even when I'm writing dungeons, I try to add a flavor of a time clock (for instance, an entire castle in an undersea magic bubble...and the bubble was breaking) or other importance (you need get this magic key so you can get into the ancient vault). I'll add to just about everyone else and say that terrain is a huge factor. In combat traps are pretty darn awesome. I prefer ones that can be turned against foes by the PCs, because it rewards my players for thinking smart. I had a trap that involved a magic item sitting on a pedestal surrounded by bones. Both sides of the fight were trying to claim it. The trick was that anytime someone got within 3 squares of it BAM skeletons. The Order 66 Podcast (a Star Wars saga edition podcast found at d20radio.com) has an episode entitled "The List" (I think its episode 35). This contains several things you should include in your encounters. Really helped spice up my games. And that's my advice for making combat not boring.
#42 mellored Jun 23, 2009 9:13:49	1) 5 2) dwarf fighter, elven rogue, half elf warlord, halfling cleric, elven wizard 3) don't know about equivalent level. The mechanics are quite hidden, I 'know' the DM plays it close to the published modules (currently at 7 pillared halls as previously stated); but combats regularly last more than 10 rounds often 20 rounds. The fight in particularly quoted before I thought about 2 rounds per critter wasn't too bad. 10 critters about 20 rounds. None of the critters were 1HP minions. Which btw I have not seen one of them for a long time. Question: why does it make more sense to open with at wills in general? Whats the principle behind that one? Even with you're (seemingly) defense focused party you should be able to take down an "average" creature each round, using just at-wills (so 10 rounds). Make sure you're calculating damage/attack bonuses correctly, if you're constantly needing a 15+ to hit, then somethings wrong. If anyone has <16 in their attack stat, they need to make a new character. Opening with encounters isn't always a good idea, for instance the Wizard might want to wait for enemies people to group up (paticularly in ambush situations). The fighter might want to wait to use a healing encounter power for when he's damage. The rogue might wait till he doesn't have CA, to use a CA granting power (then action point and SA). With 2 leaders, waiting till you have a bonus to hit before using a daily (or encounter) should pretty much be a given.