PDA

View Full Version : Speeding Up Combat (D&D)



Nohwl
2009-02-23, 05:21 PM
a friend of mine wants to speed up combat and came up with the idea of giving a 50/50 chance to deal double or triple damage on each attack/spell/whatever (crits would make deal even more damage). in the case of poisons and spells that take effect more than once, it would cut the time for them to take effect again in half. the idea behind it is to make the characters and monsters more powerful so combat takes fewer rounds to complete and spend less time on each indivudual combat overall. what impact would this houserule have on a game, and would it be a good idea to use? how would it effect the balance of the game?

Person_Man
2009-02-23, 05:52 PM
The easiest way to speed up combat is to use a chess clock, or some sort of similar timer. Every player gets two minutes for his turn. If his time ends and his actions aren't complete, he loses them. This also applies to each monster. When the complete round is over, the DM stops and asks if anyone has any questions, observations, needs to use the bathroom or get Mountain Dew, etc.

This works particularly well in 4E, where there are no iterative attacks. But I've seen it work in 3.5 as well. I'd discourage you from screwing with basic mechanics like you suggest though, as it tends to have unintended consequences.

Kurald Galain
2009-02-23, 05:56 PM
a friend of mine wants to speed up combat and came up with the idea of giving a 50/50 chance to deal double or triple damage
That doesn't strike me as a good idea. The way to speed up combat is to use less dice rolls, not more.

The easiest way to speed up combat is to not use a battle map (boy does that ever slow things down). A second step is to not use initiative.

Hzurr
2009-02-23, 06:05 PM
The easiest way to speed up combat is to not use a battle map (boy does that ever slow things down). A second step is to not use initiative.

hmm...how do you keep track of things, then? I mean, in some games, I can see how not using a map could work (although in 3.5E and especially in 4E it seems like this would make combat nearly impossible.

And...no initiative? So people just...go when they feel like it?

Ovaltine Patrol
2009-02-23, 06:06 PM
I keep notes with descriptions of my character's abilities and options, I also list the books and page numbers they're taken from, it speeds things up not having to flip through books.

Because I've been traveling frequently of late, I've updated my notes so that anyone in the group could play my character in combat while I'm gone. Naturally, this helps to alleviate some of the slowdown that happens when a group has to bring along an extra character.

Falling Out
2009-02-23, 06:10 PM
I use average damage for all things. So when my wizard whips out a 15d6 spell...that's just 15x3.5=52

Barbarian powerful charges in and hits for 1d12+6+3d6+1d6fire...it is pre-calculated that the attack does 26 damage. Monsters are the same.

The trick is to have this pre-calculated on the character sheets to speed things up. This way only the d20 is necessary to hit/save etc.

Could have them roll damage at the same time, but I find the pre-set damage that much easier.

If players complain about the set average damage limiting those moments of super-max crit-insta-kill insanity that make the game so fun, consider increasing the crit range of all attacks by one or two to balance it out (increases excitement and despair as well)

EDIT - Agree on Initiative - I scrap it. I make the players sit around the table/couches in order of initiative and we go around the circle. I then play in monsters where ever I deem it appropriate based on RP and the situation that led to the combat.

Kurald Galain
2009-02-23, 06:19 PM
hmm...how do you keep track of things, then? I mean, in some games, I can see how not using a map could work (although in 3.5E and especially in 4E it seems like this would make combat nearly impossible.
I agree that you can't play 4E without a battlemap. At any rate the many situational modifiers of 4E seem to preclude quick combat.


And...no initiative? So people just...go when they feel like it?
No :) but going clockwise around the table is markedly faster. As is having the DM keep track in what subgroups (if any) the combat takes place. This is slightly fuzzy to explain and does require an above-average DM, though.

Nohwl
2009-02-23, 06:27 PM
That doesn't strike me as a good idea. The way to speed up combat is to use less dice rolls, not more.

The easiest way to speed up combat is to not use a battle map (boy does that ever slow things down). A second step is to not use initiative.


it would be the same amount of dice + 1 extra to determine if you double it or not. its not roll damage again and add them, it is take what you rolled and multiply it by 2 or 3.

SimperingToad
2009-02-23, 06:33 PM
MUAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA!! ... Sorry, couldn't resist. :smallwink::smallbiggrin:


No :) but going clockwise around the table is markedly faster. As is having the DM keep track in what subgroups (if any) the combat takes place. This is slightly fuzzy to explain and does require an above-average DM, though.

Sounds a lot like OD&D/early AD&D. :smallbiggrin:

Okay. Enough funnin' around. To answer the OP. Instead of messing around with damage multipliers, why not just halve hit points for all? A lot simpler. I wouldn't do either myself, but that's just me.

On the subject brought up of keeping notes to make reference easier, one could also flag pages frequently used in the books with a sliver of post-it note, writing the name of the section or somesuch on the note.

Nohwl
2009-02-23, 06:46 PM
he wants combat to be around 20 or 25 minutes per encounter, he is already limiting time players have to decide on actions and isnt rolling for initiative.



Okay. Enough funnin' around. To answer the OP. Instead of messing around with damage multipliers, why not just halve hit points for all? A lot simpler. I wouldn't do either myself, but that's just me.

he didnt want the effect to happen all the time.

Satyr
2009-02-23, 07:01 PM
One of the common mistakes made when people try to speed up combats or similar mechanical ways to solve confrontations is, that they sacrifice the game's versimiltude or suspense in the way. Congratulations to this. Now you have quick, meaningless and stupid combats.

As I really don't think that this is a desirable trade, the question should be "How can I increase the speed of the game without sacrifing the suspense and versimilitude that makes the combat actually interesting?" The answer is simple: Increase the lethality of the combats. If this is done right, you do not only have faster combats, but also more dramatic and plausible ones.

Good rules are:
A changed massive damage rule that force characters to succeed in a fortitde save or become sickened/nauseated, dependent of the damage. Overall lower hitpoints Less additional rolls - no Concentration checks for hurt spellcasters (just let them lose the spell), no verification of criticals) instead of rolling for the attack of monsters, let the players roll for their defense instead and let the opposition take 10 for the attacks, Best way to spice the somewhat dull D&D combats up. Everyone gets all iterative attacks on a Standard attack. A full attack offers an additional attack with the highest attack bonus.

Thurbane
2009-02-23, 08:30 PM
The easiest way to speed up combat is to use a chess clock, or some sort of similar timer. Every player gets two minutes for his turn. If his time ends and his actions aren't complete, he loses them. This also applies to each monster. When the complete round is over, the DM stops and asks if anyone has any questions, observations, needs to use the bathroom or get Mountain Dew, etc.

This works particularly well in 4E, where there are no iterative attacks. But I've seen it work in 3.5 as well. I'd discourage you from screwing with basic mechanics like you suggest though, as it tends to have unintended consequences.
I really like this idea, and we've even toyed with using it in our own (3.5) group. Most of our lost time during a combat comes from player (and sometimes DM) indecision about what action to take in a round.

Also, the basics apply - have players be thinking about what they will do when it gets to their turn. If you're going to use an item, spell, feat or skill that you aren't already intimately familiar with, spend a few moments reading it over again before it hits your go in the initiative. If you're the DM, try to have a mental outline of the opponents tactics each round ahead of time, but be ready to adjust them as needed if the players pull out something unexpected.

Really basic advice, but also extremely useful.

Raum
2009-02-23, 09:18 PM
what impact would this houserule have on a game, and would it be a good idea to use? how would it effect the balance of the game?In general, more randomness works against the player characters. With a bad roll, even easy opponents can kill a PC. Not necessarily a bad thing, but I'd recommend switching to a system meant for gritty combat if that's what you're going for. Additionally, more rolls almost always equates to more time required. (Iterative attacks and multiple actions made 3.x much slower than AD&D.)

As Kurald mentions, one of the easiest ways to speed combat is to limit player decision time. We used to use a 30 second timer...if you didn't know what you were doing within 30 seconds, you were on hold and the turn passed on to the next person. It encourages people to pay attention and plan while those ahead of them are taking their turns.

I'll also recommend using initiative cards. They make tracking who is next easy with just a name, add some basic info (AC, saves, spot, etc) and the GM can use them as a quick reference.

For system mods to combat, I'd look at the Vitality / Wound point system in the SRD. It has it's own set of issues but does make combat grittier with higher likelihoods of a critical taking a PC down. If you're interested in exploring other systems entirely, I recommend Savage Worlds. Its combat is extremely fast compared to vanilla D&D.

Xuincherguixe
2009-02-23, 09:21 PM
Bring a computer. That can speed up a lot of the dice rolling.

Though really, where most of the bottleneck tends to be is where players have to make decisions.

ericgrau
2009-02-23, 11:17 PM
No, you'll just screw up balance in other ways as there are effects that are dependant on saves, number of rounds, etc.

Some common time saving tips:

Pre-roll initiative. Post it where all can see and tell someone when their turn is coming and when it comes.
Have any relevant stats of summons, spells, rules you like to use, etc. pre-printed out or at the very least bookmarked.
I'm in a group that pre-rolls their attacks and damage, with monster AC posted where all can see. That seems to help.
The DM can make passive checks for the players rather than calling for rolls. Some rules require it anyway. There are also often rules for using one check for the whole party.
Limiting people's turn time helps. Don't be too tyranical but don't let players undergo massive planning either.
The Other Gaming Company sells spell cards, item cards and monster cards that lets you have the rules right in front of you without flipping through books.
I've been working on some quick reference sheets that contain all the combat rules. It's well organized for easy reference, 4+2 (6) pages for the player, and an additional 4 pages for the DM. I finished one for myself that includes a consolidated skill system I want to use. I plan on converting it to the normal skill system (and all normal rules) eventually for others. I could be prodded to make that a higher priority if anyone wants it.


There are more at the www.wizards.com site in the Resources => 3.5 archives section.

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-02-23, 11:56 PM
Time-saving tips I have used:

* Sort the players when they sit down in clockwise order of their Initiative Modifier. So the one to the right of the GM is the one with the highest Initiative Mod, and he, by default, goes first. Whenever you get to the initiative mod for the monsters, they go at that time.

* I cannot stress the suggestion about a chess clock/hourglass/stopwatch hard enough. If the players KNOW they have a time limitation, they are less inclined to dilly-dally around, and actions occur quickly.

* Have PC cards on hand, with all of the characters' relevant skills and saves that they won't know the result of if they fail. This includes the passive sensory skills (spot and listen), the stealth skills (hide and move silently), and anything the character might use 'reflexively' (i.e. and Elf would have Search for the Concealed Door Detector racial ability). Now, if the party runs up against something, you already know what the relevant modifiers are, and roll for the party, presenting your story based on the results.

* If one has enough dice, roll all attacks together in a huge heap of d20's, preferably color-coordinated. State before hand "The blue d20 is the first attack, the white one is for the next", and so forth. That way you can tell which of the attacks hit, which tells you how much total attack dice should be rolled.

For example, I've got a character with ITWF. He's a Bloodclaw master, so he gets full Str on his offhand attacks, and doesn't have a -2 penalty on his attacks for TWFing. He also has the feat Snap Kick, which gives him an additional attack, at a -2 for all of them. I roll 5d20, stating that the three blue d20's are for the highest attack bonus, and the white ones are for the two iterative attacks, one with each hand. Preferably, I state this at the beginning of the gaming session, and it is duly recorded. I roll up 3 hits. Each hit does 1d10+5. So I roll 3d10+15. Two rolls to deal with five attacks.

Nohwl
2009-02-24, 12:47 AM
No, you'll just screw up balance in other ways as there are effects that are dependant on saves, number of rounds, etc.

so how could you make combat take fewer rounds, and keep it relatively balanced?