Citation for 3 round combat?

[GreyBlack]

So I've been hearing it bandied around that, according to WotC, combats should only last 3 rounds. Where does this citation come from? Or is it just one of those apocryphal moments about the system?

[MaxWilson]

So I've been hearing it bandied around that, according to WotC, combats should only last 3 rounds. Where does this citation come from? Or is it just one of those apocryphal moments about the system?

It's probably derived from the DMG chapter on monster construction, where it says you should assume three-round combats when approximating average DPR for monsters that have 1/fight abilities[1].

In practice there's a lot more variation than that; some fights last half a round, others can last for nine rounds, and still others can last for hours (e.g. a Mexican standoff against an undead Bone Naga where everyone is just holding readied actions waiting for the other guy to show his face, until something changes the status quo). It depends on both player tactics and total monster difficulty--harder fights are generally longer both in real, table time and in total rounds to resolve.

[1] But obviously if you want to be more precise, you can. E.g. if you have a monster that has a breath weapon with Recharge 5-6 AND has Flyby and a high movement rate, it would be totally reasonable to do the math as if the monster would get to use its breath weapon every round, because it can just wait until the breath weapon recharges before making another strafing run. This is why the DMG's last step in the CR computation is, paraphrased, "adjust CR to taste, using your own judgment."

[Unoriginal]

So I've been hearing it bandied around that, according to WotC, combats should only last 3 rounds. Where does this citation come from? Or is it just one of those apocryphal moments about the system?

No, it's not that combat should only last three rounds, it's that a solo monster of a CR equivalent to the group's level will probably last three rounds.

It's not a guideline or anything, just how they expect monsters to last given their calculation.

The DPR part of the CR is calculated on a period of three rounds, which allows one to calculate the threat level of big hitters that run out of steam fast (like Spellcasters) just as well as those who do consistent damage.

That's it.

[GreyBlack]

It's probably derived from the DMG chapter on monster construction, where it says you should assume three-round combats when approximating average DPR for monsters that have 1/fight abilities[1].

In practice there's a lot more variation than that; some fights last half a round, others can last for nine rounds, and still others can last for hours (e.g. a Mexican standoff against an undead Bone Naga where everyone is just holding readied actions waiting for the other guy to show his face, until something changes the status quo). It depends on both player tactics and total monster difficulty--harder fights are generally longer both in real, table time and in total rounds to resolve.

[1] But obviously if you want to be more precise, you can. E.g. if you have a monster that has a breath weapon with Recharge 5-6 AND has Flyby and a high movement rate, it would be totally reasonable to do the math as if the monster would get to use its breath weapon every round, because it can just wait until the breath weapon recharges before making another strafing run. This is why the DMG's last step in the CR computation is, paraphrased, "adjust CR to taste, using your own judgment."


No, it's not that combat should only last three rounds, it's that a solo monster of a CR equivalent to the group's level will probably last three rounds.

It's not a guideline or anything, just how they expect monsters to last given their calculation.

The DPR part of the CR is calculated on a period of three rounds, which allows one to calculate the threat level of big hitters that run out of steam fast (like Spellcasters) just as well as those who do consistent damage.

That's it.

For reference, I really hoped that it was not the case; I much prefer more varied combats myself. Thanks for clearing up ther confusion guys!

[Man_Over_Game]

For some relevant information on this exact topic (including some insight on the 3-round query), here's a link to a question on RPG Stack Exchange: How many rounds does the average combat encounter last? (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/93183/how-many-rounds-does-the-average-combat-encounter-last/93185#93185)

[strangebloke]

A lot of combats are 'over' in three rounds in the sense of being more or less decided. But actual combat length can be a lot shorter than that.

[Ninja_Prawn]

more or less decided

This is an important point. Just because a combat lasted for 6 rounds, doesn't mean the result was in the balance for that long. There's generally some mopping up at the end.

Also, in parties with a lot of nova, it's quite common for battles to be fully over within one or two rounds, which brings down the average.

[EggKookoo]

This is an important point. Just because a combat lasted for 6 rounds, doesn't mean the result was in the balance for that long. There's generally some mopping up at the end.

I'm a big believer in NPCs attempting to flee or dropping their weapons and begging for their lives. I've been known to have a full-health mook (like a goblin) turn tail simply because the guy next to him was hit. I also typically have sentient NPCs, especially the weaker ones (again like goblins), drop and "play dead" after taking about half their health in damage.

Likewise, monstrous creatures who are mainly fighting out of instinct tend to run if they get hurt too badly.

More significant opponents may stick it out longer.

[MaxWilson]

I'm a big believer in NPCs attempting to flee or dropping their weapons and begging for their lives. I've been known to have a full-health mook (like a goblin) turn tail simply because the guy next to him was hit. I also typically have sentient NPCs, especially the weaker ones (again like goblins), drop and "play dead" after taking about half their health in damage.

It gets even more entertaining if you make it a policy of sometimes/often adding enemies who fled from one encounter into the next encounter. It gives players an incentive to play more strategically: suck enemies in, deceiving them into thinking you're weaker than you really are so they won't flee yet, then cut off their retreat and capture them all.