quicker combat - D20 only

[da newt]

One of my players is math-phobic so we decided that they would use average rolls for damage and anything that doesn't involve a D20 to determine success/fail. With some simple changes to the character sheet their turn in combat has become MUCH more efficient and MUCH less stressful.

Are there any unintended consequences of this alt rule?

I've often done this sort of thing as DM when I'm running combat for numerous bad guys - I'm temped to run a couple sessions where this is a table rule. I'm willing to bet it will really speed up combat both from the time savings of rolling all the dice and adding them all up and also from a simplified decision making stand point.

Yes, it removes a HUGE part of the tradition and the allure of splashing all the dice for a big SA or Fireball, but other than that, what do you all think? Would it break anything?

[kazaryu]

One of my players is math-phobic so we decided that they would use average rolls for damage and anything that doesn't involve a D20 to determine success/fail. With some simple changes to the character sheet their turn in combat has become MUCH more efficient and MUCH less stressful.

Are there any unintended consequences of this alt rule?

I've often done this sort of thing as DM when I'm running combat for numerous bad guys - I'm temped to run a couple sessions where this is a table rule. I'm willing to bet it will really speed up combat both from the time savings of rolling all the dice and adding them all up and also from a simplified decision making stand point.

Yes, it removes a HUGE part of the tradition and the allure of splashing all the dice for a big SA or Fireball, but other than that, what do you all think? Would it break anything?

i mean, really the only rules its gonna interact/inerfere with are ones that revolve around like 'you can reroll damage dice' or 'treats 1's as 2's' (great weapon fighting style, savage attacker, elemental adept, etc) so as long as the player doesn't have any of those it should be fine. if they do have those, you may want to take a look and see about giving them the option to trade them out. but its unlikely, they're not super common (except maybe great weapon fighting style)

[quindraco]

One of my players is math-phobic so we decided that they would use average rolls for damage and anything that doesn't involve a D20 to determine success/fail. With some simple changes to the character sheet their turn in combat has become MUCH more efficient and MUCH less stressful.

Are there any unintended consequences of this alt rule?

I've often done this sort of thing as DM when I'm running combat for numerous bad guys - I'm temped to run a couple sessions where this is a table rule. I'm willing to bet it will really speed up combat both from the time savings of rolling all the dice and adding them all up and also from a simplified decision making stand point.

Yes, it removes a HUGE part of the tradition and the allure of splashing all the dice for a big SA or Fireball, but other than that, what do you all think? Would it break anything?

If your player is that terrified of math, make sure you (correctly) precalculate their crit damage, too. But to be honest, it would probably be better to have them play a class that rolls less damage dice, like a caster leaning into buffs and save-or-suck effects.

[kazaryu]

If your player is that terrified of math, make sure you (correctly) precalculate their crit damage, too. But to be honest, it would probably be better to have them play a class that rolls less damage dice, like a caster leaning into buffs and save-or-suck effects.

why would that be better? what if they prefer playing a damage dealer, and just specifically dislike having to do the math?

precalculating damage solves the problem, what problem are you trying to solve by recommending they not play the character they wanna play?

[Sillybird99]

I can see issues with things like guidance, bless, bane, bardic inspiration, maneuvers etc. There is really no escaping non d20 rolls unless you build your game around it.

[Tanarii]

IMX rolling dice for damage is the least part of combat speed issues. Speed issues almost always come from the DM not setting and sometimes enforcing the pace properly, and players taking far too long to dither over what action* to take as a result. Actual turn resolution is pretty quick.

*I include trying to precisely trace a movement path or place an AoE spell as part of dithering over what action to take, not resolution.

[EggKookoo]

IMX rolling dice for damage is the least part of combat speed issues. Speed issues almost always come from the DM not setting and sometimes enforcing the pace properly, and players taking far too long to dither over what action* to take as a result. Actual turn resolution is pretty quick.

*I include trying to precisely trace a movement path or place an AoE spell as part of dithering over what action to take, not resolution.

If I have to be completely honest, as the DM I'm probably no less a bottleneck than any of the players. I have to consider multiple creatures, both as individuals and sort of as a strategic gestalt. And I have to put mental effort into making them do more than just stand there and hit the PCs. The players have to make that same effort, but really only if they want to. What I do with the enemy creatures has a lot of influence over the feel of the fight. More so in proportion to me as an individual than for any given player.

Die rolling is not where things slow down for us. Frankly, the alternating between TotM and doing some simple, unambiguous math helps keep us fresh, but I can certainly see that as dependent on how one's brain likes to work.

Combat slows down from the player side (at our table) because PCs have so many tools and options. Players feel the need to make sure they're not wasting their turn by picking something suboptimal.

[loki_ragnarock]

I do this for NPCs because it's less for me to do; no fuss, no muss, the monster does 7 damage on a hit. (0r 1 damage to the barbarian/rogue multiclass.) Anything that keeps the DM from rolling additional dice is all to the good.

I don't think you can do it for PCs because dice manipulation mechanics - a pet peeve of mine - are becoming increasingly common in the design space. There are several stumbling blocks already, and 'twould only harder in the future.

If the player would just prefer to give you the average damage while everyone else does their own thing, that's a compromise.

I have to say, roll an 8 sided dice and add four strikes me as pretty extremely mathphobic.

[Man_Over_Game]

I can see issues with things like guidance, bless, bane, bardic inspiration, maneuvers etc. There is really no escaping non d20 rolls unless you build your game around it.

You just average those, too.

Take the size of the die, add 1, cut the total in half, and you get the average.

1d6 averages to 3.5.
1d8 averages to 4.5.
1d20 averages to 10.5.
Etc.

From there, just decide on whether you're averaging high or low. I'd average high (so a 1d6 averages to a 4) since the players are generally rolling more dice than enemies.

[Sillybird99]

You just average those, too.

Take the size of the die, add 1, cut the total in half, and you get the average.

1d6 averages to 3.5.
1d8 averages to 4.5.
1d20 averages to 10.5.
Etc.

From there, just decide on whether you're averaging high or low. I'd average high (so a 1d6 averages to a 4) since the players are generally rolling more dice than enemies.

Averaging doesn't solve the problem. Mathphobic doesn't mean you can't roll a die and read the number. It's the math that's the problem, and these abilities add another integer into the equation.

[Joe the Rat]

A dice roller app might be a better solution. Preprogram the rolls and modifiers, then they just push the button.

I am surprised they are okay with d20+modifiers, but not d6+modifiers, unless it's the adding multiple dice thing.


One of my other fallback systems (Savage Kingdoms) is literally d20 only, but it's even worse for modifiers (3.5 style featbumps and situational +/-, [roll + modifier - armor + AP] for combined hit/damage). Probably not going to help in this case.

[RogueJK]

DnDBeyond has a built-in dice roller that runs off their character sheet. It factors in modifiers, and even lets you include stuff like advantage/disadvantage.

It doesn't replace 100% of the math (like when you have to factor in the aforementioned separate dice-based buffs/bonuses from class abilities or spells, or from other situational bonuses/penalties), but it'll remove a large chunk of the math.

[Man_Over_Game]

Averaging doesn't solve the problem. Mathphobic doesn't mean you can't roll a die and read the number. It's the math that's the problem, and these abilities add another integer into the equation.

Yes, but every table has a DM who can provide a translation, and the player has shown an aptitude for obeying their character sheet.

You just change stuff like Bardic Inspiration to a +4. Even if you don't like math, adding flat numbers together is probably something anyone who can play DnD probably should learn.

[OldTrees1]

With some simple changes to the character sheet their turn in combat has become MUCH less stressful. Are there any unintended consequences of this alt rule?

No significant unintended consequences in light of the intended and successful consequences.
Average damage, as a form of consistency, favors the PC in the long run. However this is not a big deal.

[Kurt Kurageous]

If I have to be completely honest, as the DM I'm probably no less a bottleneck than any of the players. I have to consider multiple creatures, both as individuals and sort of as a strategic gestalt. And I have to put mental effort into making them do more than just stand there and hit the PCs.

I address the DM bottleneck with an excel spreadsheet filled with four hundred random d20 rolls, which I mark off in order as needed. It's wonderful. I need to roll 8 saves? I just look at the next 8 numbers and say how many passed/failed. I've used this for years to speed up the phase of combat I call "Waiting around to die."

I have yet to see a satisfactory way of getting players to declare their moves, actions, etc. But I do know how to speed to hit and damage. Roll all the dice at once, preferably in a dice cup (like yatzee). It makes it much faster. Use different color dice for each attack if you multiattack. No cups? Drop all the dice in your dice tower (or is that now out of fashion?).

I cut up some overhead projector sheets into cones and circles to cover most of the spells. It makes AOE determination easy. I can do the math in my head, but players like to see that I'm being fair.

[EggKookoo]

I address the DM bottleneck with an excel spreadsheet filled with four hundred random d20 rolls, which I mark off in order as needed. It's wonderful. I need to roll 8 saves? I just look at the next 8 numbers and say how many passed/failed. I've used this for years to speed up the phase of combat I call "Waiting around to die."

I do similar things. I pre-roll monster init whenever possible (e.g. if I have a planned encounter). I allow/encourage players to use passive init (10 + dex mod, aka initiative score), which they tend to do since I have a secondary houserule that two or more allies that are adjacent to each other in initiative order without a hostile turn in between can rearrange their turns as they see fit within that grouping, and even take simultaneous actions, at least narratively. So my players know their turn order and it doesn't usually change from fight to fight. That all helps.

Really, it's the players thinking over their options that's the slowest thing from their end. And the related stuff that goes along with it, like looking something up (which is pretty rare) or asking me for clarification/interpretation (which is a little more common).

[Kurt Kurageous]

Really, it's the players thinking over their options that's the slowest thing from their end. And the related stuff that goes along with it, like looking something up (which is pretty rare) or asking me for clarification/interpretation (which is a little more common).

This is why only an experienced player should play a wizard or sorc (which I generally ban), and is why simpler classes exist.

When I play, I am thinking of more than one way to take my turn when it comes up. I need at least two because other's turns often change what I should do on mine.

[Man_Over_Game]

I do similar things. I pre-roll monster init whenever possible (e.g. if I have a planned encounter). I allow/encourage players to use passive init (10 + dex mod, aka initiative score), which they tend to do since I have a secondary houserule that two or more allies that are adjacent to each other in initiative order without a hostile turn in between can rearrange their turns as they see fit within that grouping, and even take simultaneous actions, at least narratively. So my players know their turn order and it doesn't usually change from fight to fight. That all helps.

Really, it's the players thinking over their options that's the slowest thing from their end. And the related stuff that goes along with it, like looking something up (which is pretty rare) or asking me for clarification/interpretation (which is a little more common).

I actually like to have my players roll initiative when they end a rest or set out for adventure. It helps me transition directly into the action, so there's no separation of "Threat" and "Nonthreat" modes like we're playing some kind of turn-based RPG with instanced combat arenas. It ends up with my players playing more cautiously, instead of waiting to be cautious when Initiative is rolled.

[Sillybird99]

Yes, but every table has a DM who can provide a translation, and the player has shown an aptitude for obeying their character sheet.

You just change stuff like Bardic Inspiration to a +4. Even if you don't like math, adding flat numbers together is probably something anyone who can play DnD probably should learn.

I get what you are saying but I think you are missing the point. None of abilities I mentioned are permanent buffs. You cant just add them into your average roll unless you want to have a spreadsheet of average rolls under various conditions. They pop up situationally, and then more math is required. All math required by dnd is flat math. Adding flat numbers is the problem. That's all a damage roll is.

I agree that Dnd expects people to add and subtract basic integers, and therefore dnd players should be okay with that (it's how you play the game, there are less mathematical games), but OP is trying to solve their player NOT doing basic maths.

[Man_Over_Game]

I get what you are saying but I think you are missing the point. None of abilities I mentioned are permanent buffs. You cant just add them into your average roll unless you want to have a spreadsheet of average rolls under various conditions. They pop up situationally, and then more math is required. All math required by dnd is flat math. Adding flat numbers is the problem. That's all a damage roll is.

I agree that Dnd expects people to add and subtract basic integers, and therefore dnd players should be okay with that (it's how you play the game, there are less mathematical games), but OP is trying to solve their player NOT doing basic maths.

It is all simple math, but it's not all simple tracking. There's a different mental load between remembering you can add +4 to a roll or a +1d6, especially if you're not used to thinking of dice as numbers.

Regardless of whether it's simpler to you isn't the point. Is it simpler for them? I'd say so. I'd wager that DnD would be a lot simpler if there was only 1 die rolled every turn. It probably wouldn't be much better, but it'd almost definitely be simpler.

[Sillybird99]

It is all simple math, but it's not all simple tracking. There's a different mental load between remembering you can add +4 to a roll or a +1d6, especially if you're not used to thinking of dice as numbers.

Regardless of whether it's simpler to you isn't the point. Is it simpler for them?

Ya, idk. Most tables I play at, people routinely forget they even have temporary mods like inspiration or hunter's mark lol.

[Man_Over_Game]

Ya, idk. Most tables I play at, people routinely forget they even have temporary mods like inspiration or hunter's mark lol.

You know, that's a very valid point. Physical tokens help with that, I've found. When folks look at their stuff and wonder "What's this yellow marble for?", they'll remember that they have a BI to spend.

But I agree. I used to hand out Inspiration, until I realized that my players won't spend it unless I tell them to.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I have to say, roll an 8 sided dice and add four strikes me as pretty extremely mathphobic.
At level 1, sure, but it can get bad at higher levels when you have multiple independent damage boosts, some conditional, and multiple attacks that maybe use different damage dice.

Like, imagine a level 8 War Cleric with Polearm Master, concentrating on Crusader's Mantle and wielding a +1 magic spear that does +1d6 fire damage. Your first damage roll is going to be 1d10+1d8+1d6+1d4+Str+1, and your second 2d4+Str, unless you missed with your first attack, then it's 1d8+2d4+Str+1.

Now score a critical hit.

Now realize that the monster is resistant to fire.

It's not necessarily the addition so much as keeping all the bonuses straight--the classic problem. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html). The above example is certainly on the high end of multiple-bonuses, but it's also a pretty straightforward build and simple strategy. Hell, I've had to double-check my math quite a few times and I'm the kind of nerd who's spent the last decade hanging out on gaming forums.

I mean, take my current character. I'm a Bladesinger 10/Ifit Genie Warlock 1. I have Dex 20, Int 18, and go into battle with a +1 corpse slayer scimitar while concentrating on Hex. A round or two into the fight, I use my Bladesinger special extra attack to slash once with Green Flame Blade, once normally, and follow up with a bonus action dagger attack (not boosted by TWF). My second attack misses, and my primary target turns out to be resistant to fire. I roll damage and, by impossible luck, get an average result on every die. How much damage did I just do-- and how much did you have to think about the answer?

[loki_ragnarock]

At level 1, sure, but it can get bad at higher levels when you have multiple independent damage boosts, some conditional, and multiple attacks that maybe use different damage dice.

Like, imagine a level 8 War Cleric with Polearm Master, concentrating on Crusader's Mantle and wielding a +1 magic spear that does +1d6 fire damage. Your first damage roll is going to be 1d10+1d8+1d6+1d4+Str+1, and your second 2d4+Str, unless you missed with your first attack, then it's 1d8+2d4+Str+1.

Now score a critical hit.

Now realize that the monster is resistant to fire.

It's not necessarily the addition so much as keeping all the bonuses straight--the classic problem. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0034.html). The above example is certainly on the high end of multiple-bonuses, but it's also a pretty straightforward build and simple strategy. Hell, I've had to double-check my math quite a few times and I'm the kind of nerd who's spent the last decade hanging out on gaming forums.

I mean, take my current character. I'm a Bladesinger 10/Ifit Genie Warlock 1. I have Dex 20, Int 18, and go into battle with a +1 corpse slayer scimitar while concentrating on Hex. A round or two into the fight, I use my Bladesinger special extra attack to slash once with Green Flame Blade, once normally, and follow up with a bonus action dagger attack (not boosted by TWF). My second attack misses, and my primary target turns out to be resistant to fire. I roll damage and, by impossible luck, get an average result on every die. How much damage did I just do-- and how much did you have to think about the answer?
Oh, I very much realize. With the example you gave, a person running averages is still going to have to derive the average value of each dice in the step and sum them, an even mathier prospect than rolling the dice. The delay there - tracking the number of bonuses, pulling out the book that has corpse slayer scimitar in it (Wyldemount?) - is going to come down more to bog standard system mastery than any complex math. If the math is the real concern, then the person in question will still have to outsource it regardless.

From my perspective, someone who is that afraid of math trying to take up the hobby of D&D is akin to an agoraphobe taking up the hobby of hiking. You can probably accommodate it to a greater or lesser extent, and good for you for trying to face your fears, but you're also probably not going to hike the Appalachian Trail, either.

[Bjarkmundur]

I present this as an optional rule for all my players. "All non-d20 rolls can be replaced with their average outcome". I also write down the average roll for each attack on their character sheet, in case they want to use this.

I personally do this with when I'm a player. I only want to roll a d20, and nothing else. I don't know why, but I just hate rolling for the small stuff. I play a paladin 90% of the time, and even then I never touch a d8. It's not a math thing, for me. It's just... personal pacing? I honestly don't know how I played allt these years before trying this out. It had changed my gaming experience completely. It's the one Houserule I'm never going to stop fighting for. It is essential for me for enjoying the game.

The only iffy place I can see this being used is on random tables. A clever player can use this to get a consistently good result on things like reward tables. But I honestly don't see it as a problem, just a quirk.

[Oramac]

unless it's the adding multiple dice thing.

If I understand the OP correctly, this is the primary issue, to which I would suggest two things.

First, encourage the player to play a class that has a more straightforward damage mechanic, such as Sneak Attack or Smite.

Second, use a weapon that matches the chosen damage mechanic's die size.

For example: I decide I want to play a rogue. Cool. Sneak Attack is a d6, so I'm going to use a shortsword. Now all I have to do is remember my damage rolls at 1st level deal 11 damage (1d6+1d6+dex, rounded up; assuming a 16 dex). Sure, you have to change this every time the Sneak Attack dice increase, and when you get an ASI, but leveling a character is typically done between sessions, so there's no pressure for the player to do quick math, and they can ask the DM for help if needed outside of game time. This will save embarrassment too, if that's a thing the DM/player are worried about.

[kazaryu]

Averaging doesn't solve the problem. Mathphobic doesn't mean you can't roll a die and read the number. It's the math that's the problem, and these abilities add another integer into the equation.

you can pretty easily come up with an average damage for each spell/damage source to just...read. they don't need to calculate the average damage every time, just read it off their sheet


If I understand the OP correctly, this is the primary issue, to which I would suggest two things.

First, encourage the player to play a class that has a more straightforward damage mechanic, such as Sneak Attack or Smite.

Second, use a weapon that matches the chosen damage mechanic's die size.

For example: I decide I want to play a rogue. Cool. Sneak Attack is a d6, so I'm going to use a shortsword. Now all I have to do is remember my damage rolls at 1st level deal 11 damage (1d6+1d6+dex, rounded up; assuming a 16 dex). Sure, you have to change this every time the Sneak Attack dice increase, and when you get an ASI, but leveling a character is typically done between sessions, so there's no pressure for the player to do quick math, and they can ask the DM for help if needed outside of game time. This will save embarrassment too, if that's a thing the DM/player are worried about.

similar to quindraco earlier, why? if you precalculate damage, why does it matter what class they're playing? i mean obviously something like a wizard takes a bit more time to precalculate damage, but its still doable. what do they gain by changing to a class they didn't want to play? what problem are you addressing here?

[OldTrees1]

similar to quindraco earlier, why? if you precalculate damage, why does it matter what class they're playing? i mean obviously something like a wizard takes a bit more time to precalculate damage, but its still doable. what do they gain by changing to a class they didn't want to play? what problem are you addressing here?

Good question. My thoughts
1) Nothing is gained by playing a class they did not want to change
2) At level up the player might recalculate the precalculated damage if it changes. If that is a sufficient pain point, then making that calculation easier might be beneficial.
3) If that is not a sufficient pain point, then they are already using a class that fits that consideration.


Also, good on the OP for finding a good solution that helped this player!