Is combat too quick?

[heavyfuel]

And I mean in-game time, not real life time.



If you watch The Princess Bride, The Man in Black's fight against Inigo lasts for 2 minutes and 40 seconds. Sure, both parties are messing around for great part of it, but still, that would require over 26 rounds! Same thing with Jack Sparrow vs William Turner in the first Pirates movie.

Extraordinary examples may include fights that last days, I just can't think of any right now.

Even epic fights like Kratos' or any from Shadow of the Colossus take longer than 18 seconds to finish.



So how would you do it? Simply saying that a turn is now 1 minute? Then how do you resolve movement? Can a character really only move 30ft in 30 seconds?

I'm honestly lost on how to make combat last longer.

[Segev]

The trouble is that combat takes FOREVER to resolve in real-time. So the first thing you'd have to do is make resolving each round faster, whether by abstracting far more combat to make rounds longer in game-time, or by streamlining mechanics INCREDIBLY.

You seem to be leaning towards the former. I suppose one way to do it would be to have people describe their overall strategy and order of actions, then see who interferes with what, and try to resolve a lot of it simultaneously. This might let a single "round" accomplish a lot more, but it'd be a different way of running things than normal for most combat engines, so you'd have to do a lot of thoughtful design and playtesting.

[OldTrees1]

We have IRL measurement for the weaker classes(fighters) but not for the stronger classes(mages). So you make the rounds represent longer periods of time (1min or 30secs like you said) and increase the martial actions (spells can take more time to cast if needed for balance) available during tat time (possibly including more fluidity to better represent such fights).

So if the turns are longer, you would need to allow multiple periods of movement during a character's turn and some minor movement for characters outside of their turn.

What if characters can describe slower(say 1/4th of your now faster movement speed) out of turn movement that is contingent/in relationship to the other characters. The importance is that this is described earlier so that it has little to no need for player input out of turn.
Ex 1: I do my best to stay just out of reach of the Ogre while circling away from the Orcs. (So we know that they will have minor back-forth movement if the Ogre moves and minor clockwise movement when the Orcs advance)
Ex 2: I do my best to block the Orcs from advancing down this 10ft wide passage (Diagonal steps backwards to increase effective length of the passages)

The faster in turn movement speed means you can still outmaneuver others on your turn but the out of turn movement allows you some defense against the now faster movement.

Perhaps try 30 second rounds with x4 movement speed (and thus x1 movement speed out of turn) while allowing actions interspersed inside the movement. Maybe 1 full attack per x1 movement speed or 1 spell per x2 movement speed (so at most 4 full attacks or 2 spells).

[Grod_The_Giant]

The trouble is that combat takes FOREVER to resolve in real-time.
This. Combat in D&D is very simulationist-- every action is carefully calculated and scripted. The level of abstraction is very low, at least by RPG standards. We carefully plot out movement paths, spell areas, and so on. That's a big reason why a round takes so much real-time, but it also makes it hard to handwave the duration.

Something like Fate's combat might be more up your alley, here. That's much more abstract, with pretty much every action boiling down to a single roll and even movement and positioning left vary vague. While I think the book uses the usual 1 round = 6 seconds rule, it would be easy to change that.

[gtwucla]

Comments above got it covered. I just wanted to add, where it's true that plenty of combat in the medieval world could possibly take a while depending on the situation, but if you're talking 'real world' you can't compare it to a movie. Some unarmored duels are typically very very short (look up samurai duels). On the other side, fights during wartime often take longer because a lot of it is wearing down your opponent, but who the hell wants to spend an hour wearing a target down in a game anyway.

[dascarletm]

Depending on the medium you will want your fight to last a different amount of time. In a movie you want to watch the fight for a certain window of time. Too short, and it has no impact, too long and it becomes boring.

With a TTRPG medium you will need to have the fight last within its own window. For DnD this causes fights in-game time being very short.

A fix is you could have a few rounds go by as usual, then break from round-by-round with a narrative description of what is happening. You could then go back in for a few rounds.

[nedz]

I have run a few very long fights — e.g. 30 rounds at level 14 — but it is unusual.

And no, it didn't drag. There was lots of movement and running around, with plenty of drama.

[Troacctid]

In movies, sword fighters typically fight defensively, because surviving a stab wound is a lot tougher when you're not using a hit point system that lets you walk it off like D&D does.

[Grod_The_Giant]

In movies, sword fighters typically fight defensively, because surviving a stab wound is a lot tougher when you're not using a hit point system that lets you walk it off like D&D does.
I've seen it argued that that's essentially what happens in a D&D fight as well-- hit points are largely abstract, representing... plot armor, essentially-- luck, fatigue, whatever-- you're not actually hit until they run out. Which makes sense for some things (ie, why you can walk away after getting hit in the face with a giant-sized club) but not others (why pretty much only magic can restore it). Later editions are better examples of that, I think. 3e is a bit of a muddle.

[Nibbens]

The trouble is that combat takes FOREVER to resolve in real-time.

Several others have commented on this and I'd like to add my own to the mix.

Anytime you roll over 4 dice for damage for a single attack, it's going to take time to add and then remember if there are any bonuses to add to that. It's a relatively small amount of time, but when a single high level PC is making 4 attacks himself and 4 for his cohort and then rolling 8 different sets of dice with 8 different sets of situation bonuses a single players attack action could take up to 5 minutes alone - and that doesn't include the movement and few seconds of thinking of the best order/tactical maneuvers.

Long story short i have a solution for the above. Average Damage.

I know I know, it's blasphemy to tell PCs that they don't get to roll dice anymore, but my table went from skeptics to full on believers after one session. They fully no longer even roll anything other than d20's.

Now, a single CR=APL challenge went from 30 minutes to about 6 minutes. This means more time for actual game play during a single session. They have turned and never looked back.

Of course, when there's a boss, all PCs retain the right to roll their dice... But many still don't.

[Flickerdart]

Inigo and Westley aren't fighting seriously - they're testing each other in brief clashes, then standing around patting each other on the back about impressive technique. Of course the fight takes forever! Only a handful of sword swings are actually combat rounds.

In D&D, talking is a free action, and so you fast-forward through the banter and get right to the meat of things. If you don't like that, fudge the numbers - a round becomes ten seconds, thirty, sixty, whatever you want.

[Godskook]

If you watch The Princess Bride, The Man in Black's fight against Inigo lasts for 2 minutes and 40 seconds. Sure, both parties are messing around for great part of it, but still, that would require over 26 rounds! Same thing with Jack Sparrow vs William Turner in the first Pirates movie.

Extraordinary examples may include fights that last days, I just can't think of any right now.

Even epic fights like Kratos' or any from Shadow of the Colossus take longer than 18 seconds to finish.

None of these are remotely realistic *BECAUSE* they take so long. In an actual real-life fight, depending on weapon-use and such, they're over really fast.

Compare that Captain America's fight in the elevator in Winter Soldier. Took 11 rounds for him to take out 10ish assailants unarmed. If you model him as a 6th level fighter//monk gestalt, even optimized for this situation, that's still only 5 attacks per round, dealing 1d8+Str damage. Without an absurdly high Str score, he's taking 2+ hits per target. Assuming he's forfeiting an average 2 attacks per round to misses, grappling, or having his hand bolted to the wall, it models reallly well.

[Troacctid]

I've seen it argued that that's essentially what happens in a D&D fight as well-- hit points are largely abstract, representing... plot armor, essentially-- luck, fatigue, whatever-- you're not actually hit until they run out. Which makes sense for some things (ie, why you can walk away after getting hit in the face with a giant-sized club) but not others (why pretty much only magic can restore it). Later editions are better examples of that, I think. 3e is a bit of a muddle.

I don't think that's a very strong argument. A hit is pretty explicitly a hit in this game, not a near miss ("Whoops, I almost hit you with my poisoned weapon! Now roll a save against the injury poison it somehow mysteriously applied to you!"), and luck and fatigue are already represented by other mechanics.

[Segev]

I don't think that's a very strong argument. A hit is pretty explicitly a hit in this game, not a near miss ("Whoops, I almost hit you with my poisoned weapon! Now roll a save against the injury poison it somehow mysteriously applied to you!"), and luck and fatigue are already represented by other mechanics.

It's near-misses and grazing blows that are not that serious.

That poisoned blade clearly did nick you. Make your save.

But no, the 12 damage it did isn't because it pierced an organ; it forced you to dodge enough to turn what WOULD have been an organ-piercing strike into something that just raked across a rib. But it slows you down just a little, and that dodge wore you out a bit more, so you can only avoid so many more hits like that, only turn so many more of those lethal blows into minor scratches.

Especially since the poison IS in your system. Make your save.

[Nibbens]

It's near-misses and grazing blows that are not that serious.

That poisoned blade clearly did nick you. Make your save.

But no, the 12 damage it did isn't because it pierced an organ; it forced you to dodge enough to turn what WOULD have been an organ-piercing strike into something that just raked across a rib. But it slows you down just a little, and that dodge wore you out a bit more, so you can only avoid so many more hits like that, only turn so many more of those lethal blows into minor scratches.

Especially since the poison IS in your system. Make your save.

Running with this: I think the HP is an abstraction is true to a point. yes you get injured - minor scrapes and bruises, etc. Maybe being dropped down to single digit HP is when you are hit with a telling bow.

The game conveniently makes HP simultaneously abstract and not at the same time. It's up to the DM to determine how abstract he wants it to be.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The game conveniently makes HP simultaneously abstract and not at the same time. It's up to the DM to determine how abstract he wants it to be.
This (though "convenient" may by pushing it). 3.5 really didn't do a good job deciding how hit points worked.

[Segev]

This (though "convenient" may by pushing it). 3.5 really didn't do a good job deciding how hit points worked.

"Just fine, thank you."

[P.F.]

In earlier editions a round took a full 60-second minute. In that time you would circle your opponent, feint, parry, dodge, evade, lunge, and withdraw, and finally the d20 roll represented your character's ability to capitalize (or not) on a momentary opening in your opponent's defenses. That level of abstraction proved too much for many players, who wanted a 1:1 correlation between rolls of the dice and swings of the sword.

On the other hand, theatrical combat is laughably protracted. In The Princess Bride, the duel is extended with silly sword-slapping and witty repartee; in other films it's prolonged with what cn only be excused as hilariously high hit-point totals, where characters take repeated blows to the face and completely ignore them, destroy every piece of furniture in the room by body slamming each other into it, and so on.

D&D isn't really good at simulating those kinds of fights explicitly. Rather, the 6-second round makes for a more realistic timeframe, in which characters rarely survive more than a few telling blows and fights are usually won or lost in a matter of seconds, not minutes.

The difficulty of having an extended combat is somewhat compounded by the presence of multiple party members and the use of area-of-effect magic. Usually long cinematic fights are presented as duels between two master warriors, or involve a nearly endless number of goons. In the former case, one of the other party members will typically intervene after they spend a few rounds knocking off the adds; in the latter case, the CR system normally prevents it because an encounter (even a EL+4 encounter) cannot both have opponents strong enough to harm the PC's and have enough opponents to make the fight last a long time.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The difficulty of having an extended combat is somewhat compounded by the presence of multiple party members and the use of area-of-effect magic. Usually long cinematic fights are presented as duels between two master warriors, or involve a nearly endless number of goons. In the former case, one of the other party members will typically intervene after they spend a few rounds knocking off the adds; in the latter case, the CR system normally prevents it because an encounter (even a EL+4 encounter) cannot both have opponents strong enough to harm the PC's and have enough opponents to make the fight last a long time.
The latter is an artifact of the way 3.5 monsters are typically built. Something like 4e or Mutants and Mastermind's minions (go down in one direct hit, basically) go a long way towards making big mook fights fun and threatening. The former... you can make a good boss monster, to be sure (plenty of HP and off-turn actions, basically), but you can't really ask most of the party to stand aside and do nothing in any game.

[daremetoidareyo]

The latter is an artifact of the way 3.5 monsters are typically built. Something like 4e or Mutants and Mastermind's minions (go down in one direct hit, basically) go a long way towards making big mook fights fun and threatening. The former... you can make a good boss monster, to be sure (plenty of HP and off-turn actions, basically), but you can't really ask most of the party to stand aside and do nothing in any game.

In "Tales from my D&D campaign", the presence of mooks is well integrated into 3.5. I've stolen the idea since, and it works best when you turn off critical fumbles for that encounter. It definitely becomes cinematic. I wouldn't throw mooks at PCs until level 3, either. Lucky hits are lucky hits, and they hurt the most at low levels.

[nedz]

In earlier editions a round took a full 60-second minute. In that time you would circle your opponent, feint, parry, dodge, evade, lunge, and withdraw, and finally the d20 roll represented your character's ability to capitalize (or not) on a momentary opening in your opponent's defenses. That level of abstraction proved too much for many players, who wanted a 1:1 correlation between rolls of the dice and swings of the sword.

On the other hand, theatrical combat is laughably protracted. In The Princess Bride, the duel is extended with silly sword-slapping and witty repartee; in other films it's prolonged with what cn only be excused as hilariously high hit-point totals, where characters take repeated blows to the face and completely ignore them, destroy every piece of furniture in the room by body slamming each other into it, and so on.

D&D isn't really good at simulating those kinds of fights explicitly. Rather, the 6-second round makes for a more realistic timeframe, in which characters rarely survive more than a few telling blows and fights are usually won or lost in a matter of seconds, not minutes.

The difficulty of having an extended combat is somewhat compounded by the presence of multiple party members and the use of area-of-effect magic. Usually long cinematic fights are presented as duels between two master warriors, or involve a nearly endless number of goons. In the former case, one of the other party members will typically intervene after they spend a few rounds knocking off the adds; in the latter case, the CR system normally prevents it because an encounter (even a EL+4 encounter) cannot both have opponents strong enough to harm the PC's and have enough opponents to make the fight last a long time.

Good points, also the 60 second or 6 second round is an arbitrary value which you could change without making any difference to the outcome of the combat. Does a 10 round combat, say, last 10 minutes or 1 minute ? Who cares ?

[P.F.]

The latter is an artifact of the way 3.5 monsters are typically built. Something like 4e or Mutants and Mastermind's minions (go down in one direct hit, basically) go a long way towards making big mook fights fun and threatening. The former... you can make a good boss monster, to be sure (plenty of HP and off-turn actions, basically), but you can't really ask most of the party to stand aside and do nothing in any game.

Right. The one-on-one was accomplished in The Princess Bride by splitting the party, a scenario smart players try to avoid. However, my group has had some fun cut-scene combats where most of the party is having a general melee in one area, and the odd man out is having a duel on the opposite side of the door. We alternated between the two combats round-by-round, which kept everyone involved and the suspense high. It still didn;t last more than six, seven rounds, though.


Good points, also the 60 second or 6 second round is an arbitrary value which you could change without making any difference to the outcome of the combat. Does a 10 round combat, say, last 10 minutes or 1 minute ? Who cares ?

Where it really starts to make a difference is when you have spell durations to consider. A minute-per-level spell will run out very quickly in the first case, and will linger after the fighting is over in the latter. While it is an abstraction, the magic system in particular is calibrated to 10 rounds per minute, and if the length of a round is multiplied by 10, certain spells should probably also have their durations multiplied by 10. However, switching spells from hour-per-level to 10-hours-per-level would have different far-reaching effects, both in and out of combat.

[Kyberwulf]

I don't know if this has been touched upon. Movie fights are prolonged and made to look pretty, because they are trying to entertain you. Comedy in interjected, near misses. Plot armor protects main characters from getting hit and killed outright by the more often superior bad guy, so you can root for the underdog. Actual combat by trained people is over pretty quickly. Even if you take entertainment like Boxing, Mma stuff, or even WWE stuff. It's all for show, no one is actually trying to kill each other. In these type of entertainment. There are rules in place to protect the athletes. In movie, Moral rules are in place to protect the audience from reality. That is why when you hear people who experience real violence first hand. They usually say they are surprised by how fast it. How quickly it was over, from start to finish.

[nedz]

Where it really starts to make a difference is when you have spell durations to consider. A minute-per-level spell will run out very quickly in the first case, and will linger after the fighting is over in the latter. While it is an abstraction, the magic system in particular is calibrated to 10 rounds per minute, and if the length of a round is multiplied by 10, certain spells should probably also have their durations multiplied by 10. However, switching spells from hour-per-level to 10-hours-per-level would have different far-reaching effects, both in and out of combat.

Which could be normalised — you would be changing the timescale after all — and so such things should be fixed if you were to do this.

The main issue, more generally, is non combat actions which take place simultaneously to the combat.

In terms of the combat itself however there is little change.

[ericgrau]

The thing is even one hit tends to really hurt. It may be better to make the rounds longer rather than having more rounds. Even if you do it movie style that's a heck of a lot of misses before one blow that lands. So say your rounds are 30 seconds a piece and that 28 seconds of it is spent parrying or chanting the spell or whatever. Except then movement speed is an issue as you're now moving 5 times as far. And effectively giving everyone a massive speed boost screws up tactical terrain, because now you have plenty of time to go around any obstacle. Hmm, let's compromise, 12 second rounds but you move at half speed, so same speed per round as before. Unless you want to drop your guard and forego all attacks while provoking from everyone. Say you can't focus on getting your sword swing to land or gesture/concentrate on the spell properly while moving at full speed. That will at least bring combats to about a minute, maybe 2 minutes with banter or special events that pop up mid-combat. Much more than that if you're running a gauntlet through multiple dangerous rooms.

[Aldrakan]

Another comparison is to legends and heroic fantasy, which feature struggles between particularly skilled opponents that can last hours or even days. Obviously that would be really hard to do (without skipping over chunks of it in a way that would also break the mood), but it can be very narratively unsatisfying to realize that the epic battle with the soul rending devil who has corrupted thousands of souls over hundreds of years that you've been building up to the whole campaign lasted... thirty-six seconds. Even if he kills half of you, it seems like an anticlimax.