Battle strategy, taking up the enemy's actions!

[MarkVIIIMarc]

As a DM and as a player over the last couple months I've been watching battles from a different point of view than the usual party positioning / do I nova or not.

Quite obviously, sometimes you can an encounter can absolutely change if one side or the other spends their attack actions doing the wrong thing. Generally I'll say don't fight the Animated Objects with non AOE's while the Bard behind the scenes gets a couple shots at doing something else to you. Also you can sacrifice your Greater Steed to avoid getting attacked for a round or two worth of peaceful spell casting.

Maybe it was that talk during baseball season about the limited number of outs you have in a game but there are a real finite number of actions most PC's or bad guys will get in combat, even one I've skillfully stretched out by having the party fight an animated this and summoned that.

This also seems to be playing into an idea I have about what average damage per round is worth but I worry it is an imprecise science.

What other points on this topic should I think about?

[Frozenstep]

I mean, taking away enemy actions (or reducing the value of enemy actions) is the bread and butter of crowd control/CC. If you're fighting another group to death, there's a certain number of actions from the enemy that your side can withstand before it's a TPK, and vice versa, it's the basic idea of action economy. Getting ahead on the action economy means getting closer to victory.

What are you looking for here? Some sort of scientific analysis on how valuable it is to attempt to use CC over just damage?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I mean, taking away enemy actions (or reducing the value of enemy actions) is the bread and butter of crowd control/CC. If you're fighting another group to death, there's a certain number of actions from the enemy that your side can withstand before it's a TPK, and vice versa, it's the basic idea of action economy. Getting ahead on the action economy means getting closer to victory.

What are you looking for here? Some sort of scientific analysis on how valuable it is to attempt to use CC over just damage?

Sure and good point. I was more making conversation. Previously I'd thought of Crowd Control as things like the Entangle or Fear spells. I guess tricking them into or getting them to attack animated silverware is a form of control.

[Expected]

Sure and good point. I was more making conversation. Previously I'd thought of Crowd Control as things like the Entangle or Fear spells. I guess tricking them into or getting them to attack animated silverware is a form of control.

It has to do with opportunity cost of actions. Ask yourself: Is it worthwhile to CC enemies when you can damage them and potentially kill them before their turn? Slow vs Fireball is a good example of that. Slow mitigates damage by reducing enemy attacks to 1, decreases their AC by 2, and negates reactions. Fireball affects a wide area and deals a decent amount of fire damage (it's very effective for pure casting classes because they have access to it early). If the enemies who are slowed can be killed before their turn (due to the decrease in AC), then it was better than or equal to the effectiveness of a Fireball should said spell eliminate enemies as well--however, it took your allies actions to do so so given a choice a single Fireball is better. The same concept is true for single target spells like Tasha's Hideous Laughter and Inflict Wounds. Granted, they are spells from different classes. This is just an example and it doesn't account for effective decisions such as disabling the BBEG or eliminating groups of weaker enemies.

[MaxWilson]

As a DM and as a player over the last couple months I've been watching battles from a different point of view than the usual party positioning / do I nova or not.

Quite obviously, sometimes you can an encounter can absolutely change if one side or the other spends their attack actions doing the wrong thing. Generally I'll say don't fight the Animated Objects with non AOE's while the Bard behind the scenes gets a couple shots at doing something else to you. Also you can sacrifice your Greater Steed to avoid getting attacked for a round or two worth of peaceful spell casting.

Maybe it was that talk during baseball season about the limited number of outs you have in a game but there are a real finite number of actions most PC's or bad guys will get in combat, even one I've skillfully stretched out by having the party fight an animated this and summoned that.

This also seems to be playing into an idea I have about what average damage per round is worth but I worry it is an imprecise science.

What other points on this topic should I think about?

Sometimes time is more important than DPR, and you can often buy time with distance.

Corollary 1: charging into combat to get immediate attacks can be a bad strategy if your side of the combat has ranged superiority, because your side will have fewer rounds to exploit their ranged superiority.

Corollary 2: taking opportunity attacks is not necessarily a bad thing! Especially if you're doing the classic PAM+GWM shove-prone-and-retreat, trading a bunch of attacks at advantage from you for only one opportunity attack against your prone foe is almost always a good thing even if it reduces your DPR slightly; even against a non-prone enemy, a simple spell like Longstrider can sometimes effectively change all of a enemy's Multiattacks to opportunity attacks doing half as much damage or less, which is a win as long as the number of enemies who can opportunity attack you is low.

Corollary 3: if you have a terrain advantage (such as getting to conditionally ignore difficult terrain), try to exploit it. Ditto caltrops and ball bearings.

[Slayn82]

Once I saw gameplays of X Com 2, I started seeing combat in D&D with other eyes.

Cover and proper positioning are very relevant factors in combat that are often neglected because of the "empty battlefield of mind", and the difficulty of representing random scenarios on the fly on a physical map.

People are often hard pressed to finish encounters as fast as possible, thus favoring dps and hard control. But simply having a heavy armored fighter in cover hold a doorway while the backline takes cover and shoots, can finish encounters almost as well, with some advantages like limiting and minimizing enemy targeting options.

Also, climbing kits or carpenter tools can allow you to fix ropes on walls to block corridors, using pulleys to lift or drop heavy objects, or make some slight changes into a room, like putting tapestries or hides. Good to spread some concealment.

You can also build a plank full of nails as caltrops. Then, if the enemy tries to avoid damage going slowly, set the plank on fire.

[EdenIndustries]

But simply having a heavy armored fighter in cover hold a doorway while the backline takes cover and shoots, can finish encounters almost as well, with some advantages like limiting and minimizing enemy targeting options.

I'll second this. In a recent game, a heavy armoured fighter (and a Cleric when needed) would hold a doorway or hallway and use their action just to dodge (but they had some bonus actions and reactions to fight with too, so they did contribute to damage somewhat), with two other characters shooting from behind. Fights took a bit longer, but we rarely even got a scratch. With massive AC and disadvantage to hit, enemies had no chance. I will say that this was at relatively low levels (1-4 so far), so enemies that can bypass high AC and disadvantage (like with abilities/attacks that force saving throws) were rarely encountered. The strategy may not hold up so well at higher levels, but it was a lot of fun!

[Solunaris]

In the game I am currently playing my bread and butter is eating enemy actions. Partially because I like the support role and partially because I have am much higher combat skill than the other players in my group. By shutting down the enemies it keeps my allies safe, keeps them as the "heroes" of the combat and gives me something far more interesting to do than say "I swing my sword twice."

One of my favorite tactics is to upcast Command to force our enemies to grovel or flee. Not only does this steal their entire turn instead of just their action but it puts the other party members into advantageous positions instantly.

[Knaight]

This is already a pretty orthodox school of analysis, with a lot of pages written about it - the term you're looking for is "action economy", and searching for it should pull up a fair amount of discussion, articles, etc.

[redwizard007]

So, yeah. Sort of.

Combat basically comes down to a race to see who can burn through the opponent's HP first. Clever use of control spells can effectively hold opponents at the starting line. Damage removes them from the race all together.

Damage spells may be preferable when they can kill multiple foes in one casting, but nerfing the biggest threat for a round or two while your team beats it with pointy sticks is usually a better strategy. Essentially, it's a question of expediency vs efficiency.

[Gignere]

So, yeah. Sort of.

Combat basically comes down to a race to see who can burn through the opponent's HP first. Clever use of control spells can effectively hold opponents at the starting line. Damage removes them from the race all together.

Damage spells may be preferable when they can kill multiple foes in one casting, but nerfing the biggest threat for a round or two while your team beats it with pointy sticks is usually a better strategy. Essentially, it's a question of expediency vs efficiency.

You left out that it’s burning through hps with the fewest resource possible for PCs. Especially for published modules as you typically have a full DMG number of encounters. If it was just a race it would mean blowing your highest spell slots and throwing everything every encounter. Obviously this would only work if you have short work days.

[redwizard007]

You left out that it’s burning through hps with the fewest resource possible for PCs. Especially for published modules as you typically have a full DMG number of encounters. If it was just a race it would mean blowing your highest spell slots and throwing everything every encounter. Obviously this would only work if you have short work days.

Entirely accurate. To continue my race metaphor; it's a marathon, not a sprint.

[MaxWilson]

You left out that it’s burning through hps with the fewest resource possible for PCs. Especially for published modules as you typically have a full DMG number of encounters. If it was just a race it would mean blowing your highest spell slots and throwing everything every encounter. Obviously this would only work if you have short work days.

Only up to a certain point. You get no prize for using up only 10% of your spell slots during the adventure instead of 60%.

What you're really doing is trying to optimize your chances of success in an environment with uncertainty, e.g. not knowing how many fights you'll have today. Secondarily you're also trying to optimize table time. Net result is that simple but reasonably effective tactics like Divine Smite often get preferred even if they are inefficient, like Divine Smite--and complex tactics like getting enemies into chasing a highly-mobile PC into defenses you've prepped with cantrips, Snares, Glyphs or Warding, etc., do not get used unless the difficulty has already been turned way up, e.g. players predict having lots of really tough, unavoidable fights. Otherwise why bother?

Saving resources is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

[HappyDaze]

My group discovered the way to deal with a bunch of bad guys that have used Ready to prepare a death-by-archery shooting gallery is to initially send in a guy with 20 AC using Dodge. Nobody hit him, and then everyone else rushed in without risk of getting shot before closing to melee.

[Fable Wright]

Only up to a certain point. You get no prize for using up only 10% of your spell slots during the adventure instead of 60%.

Using only 10% of your spell slots during the adventure instead of 60% is an Achievement Unlocked. It is its own reward, and allows me to use my leftover slots to invest in roleplay stuff.

To the OP's point:

This is the foundation of my combat style, yes. As it turns out, if you lay down a Plant Growth and then separate the enemy's archers from their melee with a Wind Wall, you run into the situation where your archery is free to take down their melee without repercussion.

When I run the game, the players haaaate dragons due to their circle/strafe tactics, and the sheer difficulty of trying to force them to land. Dragons are smart. Spellcasting dragons often take Warding Wind, or Greater Invisibility to deal with the obvious drawbacks of their fighting style, and they do the heinous crime of retreating if things aren't going well.

The ideal position for the battlefield controller is to have your enemies swinging at shadows while your arrows are on point. If that means the Illusionist lays out a Programmed Illusion of a dozen archers identical to the actual archery-style fighter, all standing on top of Transmute Rock (to Mud) terrain? If it means Wind Wall and Plant Growth? If it means the party engages the enemy only on top of areas flooded with Control Water or Transmute Rock (to Mud) while under the effects of Water Walk, letting them pick their fights while the enemy is fighting at horrible disadvantage in terrain they weren't expecting?

That's all one man negating the actions of an arbitrary number of enemies. It might not be the perfect battlefield control of "everyone's dead", but it is a lot of wasted effort swinging ineffectually and burning actions to Dash towards a foe with superior mobility. It doesn't end the fight quicker, but it's trading a small number of spell slots for a massive amount of damage prevention.