PDA

View Full Version : Keeping Combat Interesting



Snarfmite
2011-03-24, 11:17 PM
The past few sessions I've played, as a player, have felt really boring (system is 3.5, but that doesn't really matter for purposes of this post). There have been very few interesting choices to make (the entire party vs a boss monster in a square empty room), so to me it's just been a tedium of rolling dice.

So, how do you keep combat interesting? What are some other aspects that can be added to encounters other than "kill the other guys"? And during combat, how do you keep players engaged and NOT feeling like they're just aimlessly rolling dice?

I can think of a few examples right off the bat (differing terrain, multiple unique bad guys, bad guys whose abilities synergize, battle needs to be over by X turns), but I'd like to hear specifics as well as generalizations (i.e., mechanically, how did abilities synergize in an encounter of yours?). When I DM, I want to make every encounter memorable, but I'm running out of ways to do this.

ooknabah
2011-03-24, 11:45 PM
My personal favorite is simply to have the battles take place within the context of the larger environment: To be a little more specific, to have the encounters be a part of the larger adventure so that the way PCs handle one encounter will affect the next one.

EXAMPLES:

I ran one adventure where the PCs where fighting through this gigantic tank base which was destroying the country side. In each battle they had to not only deal with the monsters fighting, but also the cramped quarters, and various traps that had been laid out to halt their progress. On top of that, there were also monsters operating the tank, killing hostages, etc. and the PCs knew that they would suffer consequences if they didn't deal with everything that was going on.

Another adventure was where the PCs got dropped into a maze where a ghost boss was harassing them by attacking them from the walls. They PCs had to make their way out while coming up with strategies to ward off the ghost and avoid other monsters patrolling the maze.

If the PCs have more to do than swing a sword (and it doesn't have to be combat oriented: Maybe somebody needs to pull a lever or hold a door closed of whatever) than it gives them options. Ideally, there should be ways that they can use the situation to their own advantage as well, so they are rewarded for thinking smart.

Provengreil
2011-03-25, 03:41 AM
ook's got some good points. secondary objectives and terrain are critical to keeping monotony out of it. Allow me to describe a kobold theft raid i once ran for the PCs as an introduction to the local kobolds(it was an evil campaign, they eventually buddied up).

it was night. one player, i think a warblade, was awake and failing spot checks. the kobolds took position, and launched the attack...with a warcry. Normally, starting a sneak attack by announcing your presence is a bad idea, but these kobolds had a specific goal, and some measure of the PCs abilities.

The party wakes up and engages the slingers to the north. but uh oh... as they charge in, kobold spearmen jump out from the bushes and protect the slingers. as the skirmish continues to the north, more kobolds appear from the west, again with spears screening slingers. these slingers, however, dismantle the fire and throw it on the tents to burn them down so a THIRD group can run by, picking up the PCs packs as they went. now the PCs have to stop skirmishing in the north and east to catch their packs, allowing the first groups to get away.

total kobolds killed: 5 or 6 out of up to 30, i cant remember the numbers. total monetary loss for the PCs: ~500 gp, some of which was item based. PCs interest: snagged for four whole sessions based off one encounter, first focused on revenge, followed by questioning, which led to them exploring why the raid went like that in the first place. They met the kobold leader, and an understanding and alliance ensued, which kicked off the overthrow of a kingdom...or would have if my PCs hadn't impaled themselves on the necromancers that were supposed to be more allies.

was the encounter unfair? possibly. probably, in fact. but it wasn't boring, because it was more than just a question of which order the inexplicably fearless kobold die in.

supermonkeyjoe
2011-03-25, 08:12 AM
Mixing up the terrain is a great way to make battles more varied, I ran an encounter on a series of floating platforms orbiting a central point, the main villain could teleport from platform to platform and almost everyone used new tactics and abilities.

Another battle involved protecting an NPC, a venerable psion with a total of 6HP, again, tactics were completely different.

yet another battle had everyone chasing a covered wagon on horseback.

Making the scenery a part of the encounter is the best way to make things more exciting, shifting floors, changing hazards etc. The tedium sets in once everyone uses the same tactics every time, changing the battle so that those aren't the most optimal tactics is key.

Eldan
2011-03-25, 08:31 AM
I'd also make sure to keep combat short. My group generally got bored after three rounds.

valadil
2011-03-25, 08:55 AM
For me it all comes down to terrain. My trick is to make terrain that offers obvious advantages. Give the enemies a couple minutes to find and occupy those advantages. Then put the PCs in the fight.

I like this method for a couple reasons. First off, it makes the fights dynamic. When the players finally break the enemy formation, the feel of the combat changes. Turning the tides of the battle is always more interesting than trading punches.

The other reason is that I can take away the enemy advantage. When the players scout ahead, use their divinations, or employ other methods of trickery, I can let them approach the fight from a direction the enemies weren't prepared for. I like giving out tangible rewards for smart play much better than a +2 tactical bonus or something.

If the players are really active about how the prepare for a fight I even go so far as to let them pick their own terrain. Telling them they have a cave, two trees, and a stream gives them a lot more creative freedom than drawing those things for them. They feel like that survival check paid off a whole lot more.

But good terrain is hard to come up with. I have a couple other dirty hacks for making a combat interesting.

Moving terrain always makes a fight more dynamic. Unless a wizard made a platform jumper in your dungeon or you're dealing with boat to boat combat, it can be hard to come up with plausible excuses.

Split the party. The players always say not to, so it's gotta be a good idea. Drop a portcullis between them or throw up a wall of force or something.

Reinforcements. Start the fight, then have the rest of the guys come in. I used to think this was a weak tactic. I mean, the fight goes for several rounds before the reinforcements come in. It's like I put Solid Fog on my own guys. But it can work. It gives the PCs misinformation. Once the casters have retreated to a safe place behind the melees, then the reinforcements charge the casters.

Person_Man
2011-03-25, 09:36 AM
Set pieces. A giant forge that enemies will attempt to Grapple and throw PCs into. A laboratory filled with magic chemicals that will have random effects when broken. A battlefield filled with fox holes, barbed wire, land mines, etc. A forest with trees that come alive and attack anyone nearby. And so on.

Eldan
2011-03-25, 09:40 AM
On a bridge over a lake of lava.
In a gravity-free environment on the astral plane.
On the back of a gigantic monster.
In a reality storm that randomly teleports people twenty feet every turn.

Though, additionally, description helps a lot.

obliged_salmon
2011-03-25, 10:13 AM
In my opinion, the best way to keep combat interesting is to keep it fast and deadly. It's harder to do with some games and some groups than others, though. With 3.5, for example, it's easier to promote this feel in early levels than later levels, merely because hit points increase as levels go up. In 4e, this effect is even more apparent.

If combat takes more than half an hour, I'm bored out of my mind.

Some ways to shorten up combat include having enemies run or surrender when outnumbered/wounded, cutting enemy hit points while increasing enemy damage, and rolling out attacks/damage in advance.

Also, variety in terrain and description is helpful to make things feel fresh for longer.

~Nye~
2011-03-25, 01:19 PM
Terrain is a good way to chop and change the pase of a dungeon and certain tedious battles. As a DM I find that the biggest time waster is people being indecissive in combat. We have a 2 minute egg timer to speed things up, in certain combat plays, the player gets a whole round to be able to think what can I do next?
Sometimes I make mini-scenarios for my PCs to deal with, they were in a gnome city which was being raided by lava golems, one person had to pump the water through a long hose, while the others shot at the golems from fortified posts with giant water cannons. The way I've described it doesn't really give it justice...
Pressure from external forces such as time or other constraints can offer a refreshing change. But be careful because some people often get bored of the repitive use of those things.
Using certain elements of an enviroment and make things more interactive. Make certain things explode or the element of surprise, reverse gravity every 3 rounds in an underground cavern, if they don't position themselves well they fall into stalegtites or a wierd pool of water that seems to be suspended from the ceiling, or... if your PCs like tou use mundane items, they can tanglefoot bag themselves to the floor while your enemy imaples itself to the stalegtites above... or below? :smalleek:

Ravens_cry
2011-03-25, 02:23 PM
Description, description, description. You didn't just do a critical and get a free Knockback, you devastated the orcs defences, sending him reeling while clutching a bloody wound, you didn't just cast Fireball, a gout of fire explodes in the centre of the cave as shrieks of pain and the smell of burning hair fill the room.

valadil
2011-03-25, 02:46 PM
Description, description, description. You didn't just do a critical and get a free Knockback, you devastated the orcs defences, sending him reeling while clutching a bloody wound, you didn't just cast Fireball, a gout of fire explodes in the centre of the cave as shrieks of pain and the smell of burning hair fill the room.

To add to this, you can also encourage your players to describe their actions. It's not necessary for every attack sequence, but if someone has a new Daily power they better tell us how awesome it looks.

Knaight
2011-03-27, 02:58 AM
The past few sessions I've played, as a player, have felt really boring (system is 3.5, but that doesn't really matter for purposes of this post). There have been very few interesting choices to make (the entire party vs a boss monster in a square empty room), so to me it's just been a tedium of rolling dice.

So, how do you keep combat interesting? What are some other aspects that can be added to encounters other than "kill the other guys"? And during combat, how do you keep players engaged and NOT feeling like they're just aimlessly rolling dice?

The way this is written implies that your sessions consist of almost all combat. The best way to make combat more interesting is to make combat a much more minor point - which should naturally create interest inherent in how it emerges.

Totally Guy
2011-03-27, 03:52 AM
Hmmm...

It's not what you fight.
It's why you fight.

Xefas
2011-03-27, 04:04 AM
(system is 3.5, but that doesn't really matter for purposes of this post)

I think it does. In my experience, 3.5 D&D has one of the slowest and least interesting combat systems of the dozens upon dozens of roleplaying games I've played (exacerbated by the fact that most of its mechanics are combat-focused). Sure, there are a few things you can do to make it a little bit better, but you shouldn't really have to in the first place. I'd suggest looking into alternative games, many of which are free, and all of which are going to be less than the cost of a single D&D supplement.

You'd be surprised just how much stuff gets done, and how much more full your gaming sessions seem, when you're using a system in which conflicts take 10 minutes, 15 tops.

TheCountAlucard
2011-03-27, 04:20 AM
So, how do you keep combat interesting? What are some other aspects that can be added to encounters other than "kill the other guys"? And during combat, how do you keep players engaged and NOT feeling like they're just aimlessly rolling dice?Differing tactics and terrains are definitely helpful. :smallsmile:

I'll go out on a limb and volunteer up my all-too-recent game session's combat...

The PCs had just set out to camp for the night, when suddenly skeletal hands burst forth from the ground to grapple them. At the same time, five elementally-aspected martial artists attacked them. One of the PCs found his lungs magically-paralyzed, and had to fight as he held his breath; another had magical flames ignite from his own body and had to fight as he was burning. The martial artists try to attack them from outside the field of grappling hands. Then low-end archers started attacking from surprise.

It was a tough fight for all concerned, though the PCs survived and ultimately won... but as they looked around the battlefield, they suddenly noticed that some of the PCs (namely, the ones whose players couldn't make it to the session) had disappeared, as well as the skeletal hands, two of the enemy combatants, the PCs' wagon and horses, and even the lion-demon one of the sorcerers had bound to him.

How long did this fight last, in-character? Just a little over thirty seconds. :smallamused: Took a few hours out-of-character, but I think the players were fairly captivated. :smallbiggrin:

PersonMan
2011-03-27, 07:11 AM
I think it does. In my experience, 3.5 D&D has one of the slowest and least interesting combat systems of the dozens upon dozens of roleplaying games I've played (exacerbated by the fact that most of its mechanics are combat-focused).

Could you give some examples? I've played a few systems other than 3.5 DnD but none of them seem to be what you're describing.

Gamer Girl
2011-03-27, 11:24 AM
1.Make sure everyone is ready-A lot of gamers are very casual. They get into a fight and they just roll the d20. They don't know or care much about feats, skills, abilities and such. And plenty of them want to know, but don't have the time or experience to find out.

This is where you can step into help. First simply offer help. A good thing to do is to print out all the combat information need. You can easily print stuff right off the SRD. And you can arrange it how you need it. It's great for each player to have a nice page of 'combat options'. You can make generic ones and ones for each character.

2.Enforce the speed rule-With everyone having the information in front of them, you want combat to be fast. Get people into the habit of planing ahead. When it's not your turn in combat, you should not be texting your GF, you should be getting your attack ready. So when the persons initiative comes up, give them just seconds to say an action.

3.Set a No 'can' Questions Rule-This is a big one that slows down so many games. In the middle of a fight a player will ask 'I can I use Climb to climb a tree and then drop on the monster's back?' This often stops a DM right there as then then talk about the action. The rule should be set simply as 'yes you can attempt to do any action.' Then players need not ask if they 'can'. They will just simply try the action.

4.Hide the numbers-Another thing that slows down a game and makes it boring is focusing on the numbers too much. When you tell a player they have a DC of 20 and they only have a +5 to that roll, they will feel depressed and not bother with the action as they 'might fail'. Often players won't bother to try something unless they have more then a 50% chance of success. When a gamer thinks too much about the numbers, they are not role-playing and are not having fun.

Use the Teamwork Rules-the teamwork rules can make combat much more fun.


Combat Example-The group encounters a bulette.
First the fighter types Charge attempting to do some good damage. The rogue also charges, but does a Jump/Climb/Grapple to get on the bulette's back. The cleric buffs and the wizard debuffs.

Note the rogue. At no time does the player say 'can I do that', he simply says 'I jump on it's back'. The DM nods and asks for a jump check, without telling the needed DC. When that is made, the player simply says 'they hold on', the DM asks for a grapple check and does not tell the DC.

So at the start of the next round, the rogue is on the bulette's back. If the bulette wants to get the rogue off, it will take an action(especially if the action is like 'it rolls over'). Meanwhile the rogue can dig in with his claws every round.

kyoryu
2011-03-27, 12:07 PM
Make failure a distinct possibility. If there's no chance of failure, it's not fun.

Failure can mean many things though - it doesn't have to mean TPK, or even killing a single party member. It can mean capture. It can mean depleting too many resources, forcing a retreat. It can mean that the guy you're chasing gets away, or that the guy you're protecting dies.

Combat should have success and failure conditions, ideally more than "kill the other guys" and "don't get killed."

Combat should have an effect on the larger game world, win or lose.

Quietus
2011-03-27, 01:02 PM
All of the stuff put forward here is good so far, but hasn't touched on one thing that I've found :

STOP USING HP HOUSERULES.

Seriously. So many groups I've been with have either been rolling HP for the monsters, or in many cases, giving them full HP. DON'T. All that does is drag out the combat, and turns it into a litany of "I roll to hit it again" until its HP is gone. Beef up its offense a little if you have to, but don't just turn the fight into a slugfest between people with twice as much HP as they should have. It just makes the fight longer. A brief but dangerous fight is preferable to a longer, safer one.

bloodtide
2011-03-27, 03:10 PM
Death-One thing that can make combat uninteresting and boring is watering it down to Disney 'Rated Y' level.

When everyone in the game knows that the player characters will never die and will never even be slightly harmed, then combat is dull. The players know that no matter what, they will win the fight. Much like in any 'Rated Y' movie or show, the monsters will 'just' avoid killing. Even if the character's are defeated, the players know that the monsters will just take them captive and then lock them, unguarded in the tool shed.

When the characters are Immortal, the game and combat is boring. Just like when you use the 'Invincible' code for a video game.

Xefas
2011-03-27, 03:56 PM
Could you give some examples? I've played a few systems other than 3.5 DnD but none of them seem to be what you're describing.

Well, it depends on exactly what you're looking for. If you want a system that can play D&D-style games, in D&D-style settings, but with fast and interesting combat, I'd go with Burning Wheel. It's very rules-dense like D&D, with a lot of combat options to choose from, but the combat tends to go very quickly. Even in my first session of Burning Wheel, when everyone was a bit sketchy on the rules, fights didn't go for longer than 15 minutes or so.

The only thing I'd warn is that magic in Burning Wheel is not omnipotently powerful, and it's a bit, I guess, "grittier", as characters can't ever get to the point where they can survive 1000 mile falls, or swim in lava.

If you want something less rules-dense than Burning Wheel, but still want your D&D-esque fantasy, go with "In a Wicked Age".
I actually did a one-shot with it over spring break. In one session, the party went through a dungeon filled with undead, killed a Lich, found his phylactery, found out that it had some kind of protective enchantment they couldn't break, traveled to elven lands to find a sufficiently powerful wizard that could help them destroy it, met with the elven consul, got hired to foil an assassination attempt, proceeded to do so, sought out this hermit-wizard in his tower in the middle of nowhere, ascended his tower, fighting off all the defenses and horrible beasties therein, found the wizard, negotiated for his services, and broke the phylactery. Then, they found out that the Lich had bound his phylactery into the integrity of a planar rift to the Abyss to get revenge on the world if he were ever truly killed. They traveled back to their home kingdom to find it besieged by an army of demons, helped liberate a city under siege, coerced the commander in charge to withdraw from the city and help the party by using his forces to cut a swath for them back to the Lich's dungeon, fought their way back in, and had a final confrontation with a big fiery demon not unlike a Balor.

And it wasn't like we glossed over anything. We played out conversations, and narrated the travel time, and all that kinda thing. There were villainous monologues. A few times, the party stopped everything to argue amongst themselves (in character). One PC actually died partway through and whipped up a new character mid-game. There were a few minor side-plots as well, like the roguish con-man PC and the big dumb fighter PC being romantic rivals for the consul's daughter while they were meant to be protecting the consul's family from assassins (the rogue totally won).

And that was all one four-five hour session. (Including character creation)

If we're just talking about games where conflicts are fast and interesting, in general, without talking about setting, here's my list of games that I like:
http://i925.photobucket.com/albums/ad91/bluejanus/rpglikelist.png
In my experience, all of them have quicker combat than D&D, and I feel like I have more meaningful decisions to make when I'm fighting in them (from both a player and GM perspective).

gbprime
2011-03-27, 04:21 PM
Treat your game sessions like a movie or TV episode. The heroes don't often get to face opposition on their terms or in a perfect combat setup. They do every once in a while, just so they can feel good about how powerful they are, but life is rarely uncomplicated.

Location, location, location are the top three ways to spin a fight. A constricting doorway, a narrow ledge, a hazard on one side of the room, the worry of a massive AoE attack, bad guys in cover, etc, etc.

My favorite is to have a combat happen while the PC's are busy trying to do something else. most movies use this format. Example...

PC's are escorting a VIP through the city to defend him from a crime boss. As they pass through the market area, an inside man on the traveling animal show has fed loco weed to the large exotic beast and opens it's cage. Big monster rampages into the street, pandemonium ensues. PC's start to react to this when a couple rooftop snipers open up on them in the chaos. And top it off with a round or three later the thugs move in to kidnap the VIP and haul him off through the crowd.

So you have CR appropriate encounter consisting of dispersed thugs and a berserk monster with the PC's pulled in multiple directions over several rounds trying to (A) stop the monster, (B) get the archers, and (C) stop the kidnapping. Add panicking, stampeding townsfolk where appropriate. :smallbiggrin:

THAT... was a memorable fight. :smallwink:

Snarfmite
2011-03-27, 04:33 PM
I'd suggest looking into alternative games, many of which are free, and all of which are going to be less than the cost of a single D&D supplement.
**EDIT: you already addressed this while I was typing this post, thanks!
If you can suggest any of these systems, I'd be happy to give them a look. The problem is, my group are not hardcore gamers at all, and having them learn a new system might be too taxing; plus, I already have so many 3.5 materials that it makes things much easier for me.

The way this is written implies that your sessions consist of almost all combat. The best way to make combat more interesting is to make combat a much more minor point - which should naturally create interest inherent in how it emerges.
Yes, that's pretty true. He focuses on combat almost entirely. He makes cool boss monsters, but the fights themselves are not very interesting, plus he doesn't know the rules as well as he should (takes time looking up rules) and he rolls in secret, and fudges a lot (which kills interest entirely for me... why fight if you know you're gonna win?).

Anyway, I'm looking into houseruling a way for 3.5 combat to stay at a good pace - this involves removing any +X bonuses on attack/damage rolls (like from Bull's Strength or Inspire Courage) and replacing them with physical tokens which can be spent for various benefits. I'd really appreciate any feedback on my ideas which are found here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10557503#post10557503) (and are almost directly lifted from another homebrew system).

This should hopefully remove some of the tedium of remembering all those numbers during a combat turn. Instead, we can focus on making interesting decisions during combat, which will be largely drawn from all of the awesome discussion in this thread.

Xefas
2011-03-27, 05:24 PM
The problem is, my group are not hardcore gamers at all, and having them learn a new system might be too taxing

I'll also point out that most games are not as complicated as D&D, or GURPS, or M&M, or that kind of thing. Burning Wheel is a pain to learn, so don't go with that. But, I taught my entire group every mechanic of In a Wicked Age in about 5-6 minutes. Dogs in the Vineyard or Apocalypse World will take longer than that, but so very much less time than something like D&D, GURPS, or Burning Wheel.

I could probably teach a group every mechanic of Primetime Adventures in under 30 seconds if I practiced. (Primetime Adventures is pretty much as close as you can get to freeform while still qualifying as a game system).

valadil
2011-03-27, 05:37 PM
It's not what you fight.
It's why you fight.

That's an awesome point and I'm a little embarrassed I forgot it myself. So to save face, here's some more thoughts on the matter.

Fights shouldn't be obstacles. You shouldn't fight a stegosaurus just because it was sitting on the path between your hometown and your destination. There's no meaning to that fight. It's filler. And on some level you and everyone at the table knows it's filler. Of course it's not going to be an interesting combat.

Compare that with a deliberate fight. When I say deliberate, I mean premeditated murder. Either the PCs decide that someone needs killin', or someone decides that the PCs need to go. Both of these situations are big deals. When you have that kind of meaning backing your fight, people get more emotionally involved. In fact, this is one of my tricks for getting roleplayers and munchkins to play together. As long as the roleplayers have juicy meaning to bite into, they're happy to play a combat. They just need a reason to be in the fight.

byaku rai
2011-03-27, 06:40 PM
Here's an idea, based on the Laws system from Final Fantasy Tactics:

The bad guy has set up areas in his domain where certain types of abilities trigger extremely dangerous magical traps, impossible to disarm. The only way through is to avoid using those specific abilities. For example, maybe one area is set up so that if anyone does any fire damage to anyone else, they get automatically hit by a high-level fireball.

If you use this, though, you have to make sure that the players know about the rule before the battle starts (a Spellcraft check, maybe, or have one of the enemies demonstrate by breaking the rule in front of the characters). Otherwise it will lead to a WTF reaction for the players.

This makes the combat more interesting by forcing players to approach battles with a different attitude, especially if you're creative with the laws.

Snarfmite
2011-03-28, 04:37 PM
I've looked into a few of the systems Xefas suggested, and they definitely have a different approach to combat than D&D. Could anyone with experience with different combat systems describe the game system and what makes it different?


I especially like what seems to be the idea behind Burning Wheel combat: each player writes a short queue of actions without knowing what their opponent or their teammates are going to do, and then resolves each action in order (comparing their result against what their opponent chose to do?). If anyone knows any d20 houserules that could incorporate this into combat, that would be awesome, although I have a hard time seeing these two systems working well together.

Knaight
2011-03-28, 05:39 PM
That's an awesome point and I'm a little embarrassed I forgot it myself. So to save face, here's some more thoughts on the matter.

Fights shouldn't be obstacles. You shouldn't fight a stegosaurus just because it was sitting on the path between your hometown and your destination. There's no meaning to that fight. It's filler. And on some level you and everyone at the table knows it's filler. Of course it's not going to be an interesting combat.

Compare that with a deliberate fight. When I say deliberate, I mean premeditated murder. Either the PCs decide that someone needs killin', or someone decides that the PCs need to go. Both of these situations are big deals. When you have that kind of meaning backing your fight, people get more emotionally involved. In fact, this is one of my tricks for getting roleplayers and munchkins to play together. As long as the roleplayers have juicy meaning to bite into, they're happy to play a combat. They just need a reason to be in the fight.
I would also add that fights can be used to highlight aspects of the setting. If an area is in turmoil and particularly lawless then fighting bandits or slavers could reinforce that. If the culture of an area tends towards obsession with honor then encountering a duel or an injured person left to die after one would enforce that. If an area has essentially become an unwatched gang controlled slum due to trade drying up and everyone with means leaving, then running up against a gang, or a thief trying to get food makes sense and adds to the setting. So on and so forth.

This can easily be over used, and shouldn't be used very often, but it does serve a useful purpose. Moreover, if the players decide that they have a particular interest after some fight or other, its easy enough to fit what is going on into the setting in a specific manner, as it already emerged from a gneral one.

TheCountAlucard
2011-03-28, 08:20 PM
Exalted is a game that can make for interesting combats. The system even has a set of rules built-in for rewarding attempts to make the game interesting. "Stunts" are when a player describes his character's action in an interesting fashion, and sufficiently-awesome stunts are in turn rewarded with extra dice on the roll.

Unfortunately, combat's also one of the places where the game is at its slowest; each person's initiative roll determines when they act in the first six seconds of combat, and after that, you have to track them by the speeds of their respective actions to maintain a sense of whose turn it is. And the turns themselves? :smalleek: Each person's attack is resolved in ten steps, which, while helpful for anticipating when and how a person can use what power, means that a person employing a number of different Charms is going to take long turns by necessity. :smalleek:

AslanCross
2011-03-29, 08:41 AM
Set pieces. A giant forge that enemies will attempt to Grapple and throw PCs into. A laboratory filled with magic chemicals that will have random effects when broken. A battlefield filled with fox holes, barbed wire, land mines, etc. A forest with trees that come alive and attack anyone nearby. And so on.

This, so many times this. Even the most basic dungeon rooms could have high ceilings and hanging chandeliers, meat hooks, or whatever. Environment is as important to the encounter as the monsters are.

Britter
2011-03-29, 08:48 AM
I especially like what seems to be the idea behind Burning Wheel combat: each player writes a short queue of actions without knowing what their opponent or their teammates are going to do, and then resolves each action in order (comparing their result against what their opponent chose to do?). If anyone knows any d20 houserules that could incorporate this into combat, that would be awesome, although I have a hard time seeing these two systems working well together.

I don't think it would work very well. There are a lot of system tools and assumptions that allow the Burning Wheel Fight! mechanic to work, and DnD really doesn't support them. DnD doesn't do simultaneous actions very well, for example, and the passes in fight are contingent upon that.

I love the Fight! system, and I think it is one of the things that BW does very well, but I wouldn't try to graft it onto DnD. I don't think the end result would be very satisfying.

The best fights I have had in DnD have occured in a 4e campaign a friend is running He has accsess to a lot of miniatures and scenery, and his fights are all set-pieces, in big, visually appealing rooms. the ones that work best have been the fights with a medium number of opponenets, maybe 3-4 more than the party (only three of us playing), that manuver and have varied powersets so that we have to adapt and think tactically. Fights with a single large beasty are boring slugfests for the most part (though the beholder was pretty awesome), and fights with a massive amount of baddies, well, they cease being interesting about three turns in.

Cartigan
2011-03-29, 09:02 AM
This, so many times this. Even the most basic dungeon rooms could have high ceilings and hanging chandeliers, meat hooks, or whatever. Environment is as important to the encounter as the monsters are.

Not to annoy all the anti-Pathfinder people here or anything, but this is the first thing that came to my mind:
http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5lc0e

Sadly, they can't figure out how to get their site to work any time anyone really wants to go there, so it's down at the moment, but that should be the right link.

Samurai Jill
2011-03-30, 09:39 AM
The past few sessions I've played, as a player, have felt really boring (system is 3.5, but that doesn't really matter for purposes of this post). There have been very few interesting choices to make (the entire party vs a boss monster in a square empty room), so to me it's just been a tedium of rolling dice.
I think you just identified the problem yourself. The players should have an array of valid tactical options open to them from the get-go, not just roll-to-hit ad infinitum. Spellcasters have an array of spells to choose from already, but swordslingers could have dodge, block, parry, feint...

Oh, right. Burning Wheel already does that. And yes, I agree that grafting on the Fight! mechanics would be very tricky, even if you ditched the idea of advance scripting and just called out maneuvers.

The hard fact is that 3E is an ugly patchwork monster that would require inordinate effort to actually make balanced and interested. Go play 4E instead. It still has a couple of rough spots (http://dungeonsmaster.com/2009/06/battlerager-fighter/), but it's also much more patchable (http://angrydm.com/2010/04/the-dd-boss-fight-part-1/).

Snarfmite
2011-03-30, 01:56 PM
I think you just identified the problem yourself. The players should have an array of valid tactical options open to them from the get-go, not just roll-to-hit ad infinitum.

Yeah, as I said I've been bored the past few sessions under this DM, but I want to avoid falling into the same traps once I resume DMing myself. I'm trying my best to houserule a few combat changes that make it more than just rolling dice, but I can't think of anything that won't grind combat to a halt.

randomhero00
2011-03-30, 02:01 PM
This, so many times this. Even the most basic dungeon rooms could have high ceilings and hanging chandeliers, meat hooks, or whatever. Environment is as important to the encounter as the monsters are.

meh, I don't really like traps.

Zaranthan
2011-03-30, 02:47 PM
meh, I don't really like traps.

Chandeliers and meat hooks aren't traps, they're environmental details. They don't do anything unless a character does something with them. He's not saying to have the meat hooks spring forth and skewer anyone who walks near them, he's saying to decorate the meat locker with them so maybe a player will think say, "hey, what if I pushed the guards into those pointy things?"

Erom
2011-03-30, 03:42 PM
Having enemies retreat realistically can help with combat lengths too. I run 4e, and my guidelines are usually:

1) Non-combat characters, many animals, and characters without any real reason to fight will break and flee when bloodied. If retreat is impossible, some enemies will attempt to surrender at this point.
2) Combat-hardened characters, predatory animals, or people with a strong reason to fight will break + flee at 10hp (I think if you are in paragon/epic this would be higher)
3) Only highly motivated and or desperate/cornered characters will fight till death/capture.

I run encounters a level or so higher in difficulty than normal to compensate. I find the extra risk of death also helps make things interesting.

Endarire
2011-03-31, 03:59 PM
1: Not every fight must be a fight.
Some fights are ones the PCs pick. They could have talked their way out, or bribed someone, or found an alternate route. They chose to fight.

2: Not every fight is a duel to the death.
Some people just want to spar. Some will surrender if they believe doing so is wise. Sometimes, the fight is just a show.

Vance_Nevada
2011-04-02, 04:22 PM
Chandeliers and meat hooks aren't traps, they're environmental details. They don't do anything unless a character does something with them. He's not saying to have the meat hooks spring forth and skewer anyone who walks near them, he's saying to decorate the meat locker with them so maybe a player will think say, "hey, what if I pushed the guards into those pointy things?"

The problem with this sort of thing in DnD is that the environment generally isn't as useful as your regular attack attempts.

Bull Rushing the guard into the meat hook:
a) provokes an attack of opportunity
b) requires opposed strengths checks

If both of those things succeed, you'll then deal some damage. But unless it's substantially better damage than you'd do whacking the guy with your 2d6 +8 Greatsword (and most of the time, it isn't), why would you bother?

You could build a Dungeon Crasher Fighter focused around bull-rushing, but then it's really more about the character than the environment.

In Dnd, your character's standard powers and abilities are usually far stronger than the abilities the environment can give you. That's why this doesn't come up much as a choice for players.

Provengreil
2011-04-03, 11:31 AM
The problem with this sort of thing in DnD is that the environment generally isn't as useful as your regular attack attempts.

Bull Rushing the guard into the meat hook:
a) provokes an attack of opportunity
b) requires opposed strengths checks

If both of those things succeed, you'll then deal some damage. But unless it's substantially better damage than you'd do whacking the guy with your 2d6 +8 Greatsword (and most of the time, it isn't), why would you bother?

You could build a Dungeon Crasher Fighter focused around bull-rushing, but then it's really more about the character than the environment.

In Dnd, your character's standard powers and abilities are usually far stronger than the abilities the environment can give you. That's why this doesn't come up much as a choice for players.

Generally I agree, but sometimes the goal might not be to deal damage or sometimes the scenery can deal a type of damage you need but are out of/don't have. example:

the sorceror is out of fireballs, having thrown them in a harrowing encounter with...something, doesn't matter. on the way out of the dungeon, you're waylaid by a troll you missed, with only a couple acid flasks and no fire damage at all. your best bet for passing by it is to use the scenery to hang it up somehow, or throw it in the forge, or something.

i know it's kind of a ropey example, as almost any party of troll-encounter level will have a decent source of acid or fire by then, but you get my point.

Just_Ice
2011-04-03, 01:00 PM
Terrain and antagonists with personality. Also, irritating special movement; when your players figure it out and screw them over, they will feel awesome.

Zaranthan
2011-04-04, 03:17 PM
The problem with this sort of thing in DnD is that the environment generally isn't as useful as your regular attack attempts.

Bull Rushing the guard into the meat hook:
a) provokes an attack of opportunity
b) requires opposed strengths checks

If both of those things succeed, you'll then deal some damage. But unless it's substantially better damage than you'd do whacking the guy with your 2d6 +8 Greatsword (and most of the time, it isn't), why would you bother?

You could build a Dungeon Crasher Fighter focused around bull-rushing, but then it's really more about the character than the environment.

In Dnd, your character's standard powers and abilities are usually far stronger than the abilities the environment can give you. That's why this doesn't come up much as a choice for players.

Maybe the guards are designed to be delaying forces: high AC, but middling strength. Maybe seeing their comrade writhe in agony convinces them to flee much sooner than if you had just cracked all their skulls. Maybe the meat hooks are on lines, and the hooked guard slides through their formation, clearing a path for you and your mates to escape through.

If your environments are lame and boring, it's not the environments' fault. You made them. Make them better.