Please do a video about combat procedure. I always use individual initiative, each round, to help keep the chaos which is combat. My players are quick on their feet so there isn't lag on their turn. BECMI, or 5e RAW initiative is far too predictable for me. Anyway, thanks for the great video again and keep the dice rolling!
This would be great! I’d love to know your procedure. Personally we don’t roll initiative (I know that’s taboo). I have 8 guys in my group (6-7 play on average). I have everyone’s speed predetermined and we rocket through rounds. I also dropped the M-M-M-M procedure because it too slow for a group that big. You just declare what you’re doing and do it. If you can’t decide I move on and come back to you at the end of the round. I clocked a battle with 7 characters vs 10 goblins two weeks ago and we were clearing rounds in about a minute each. Also as Dungeon Craft says higher hit points = slower combat.
@@Grimlore82 haha yeah he’s hardcore on pace. I borrowed a version of how he does HP. My characters start with HP = constitution score but only get between 1 and 4 HP +con adjustment depending on class up to 9th level and then nothing else. So the max hit points even a 15th level fighter with 18 constitution could ever have is 67. A 15th level magic user with say 12 con could only ever have is 20! Increases low-level survivability at the expense of long term invincibility.
Just found the channel for the first time with this video and I already love this take on combat. Don't think I've heard one like it. Please do the combat example you were mentioning, I'll take all the opportunities to learn that I can get!
I actually prefer procedural combat, but it certainly stomps on a ton of character builds. I think it would work, but you would need a group that doesn't mind a ton of homebrew. I think one of the big factors in fights taking longer is both sides have huge numbers of hit points to chew through. Great vid.
I love this! And it makes me feel validated in my own technique. Why the combat happens is a big deal to me, and I advocate for my players to be sure that they want to engage the supposed enemy. If there is no reason for the players to engage I'd rather simply gloss over it. I've had npcs bandits try to bribe the adventurers to leave them alone(which works way more than it should) or I've told them that they catch some creatures hiding from them or trying too. I've never considered directly asking them how do they win in moments when they would clearly win, and I'm going to now. But I focus and want my players to focus on the objective. If the point isn't to kill orcs we don't need to do so if orcs show up. And what the NPCs are up to upon the players approach is important to me, one of my favorite is the Obvious Trap; a group of creatures have trapped a place specifically to get NPCs that aren't cool enough to simply notice the troggs and their log trap. They then try to solve getting past these troggs as a puzzle instead of a simple combat. I learned in 4th edition that players are destined to ruin any setpiece anything; the events of the game gotta be able to ebb and flow to their actions or whims. I'm also fond of directly warning a player when their actions would make a npc want to attack them, which either changes their direct actions or makes them launch their attack first. And ultimately the more information the players have the smarter, and more interesting decisions they will make in both the social aspects of the game, and the combative ones.
" I'm also fond of directly warning a player when their actions would make a npc want to attack them, which either changes their direct actions or makes them launch their attack first." 😂😂 Player, "I poke the sleeping owlbear." GM, "It will attack you." Player, "I poke the sleeping owlbear with the entire length of my sword. Poke! Poke! Poke!"
Wow- I really appreciate this video. The ideas here, I haven’t heard from others, and it makes me look at combat in a whole new way. It makes combat “zoom-able” to its level of importance- and to its level of importance in the game, not necessarily in the story. I’ll be rewatching this video, and keeping more notes.
Bit of a long story, but you might find it interesting. One night, I was leaving a D&D session and I pulled up TH-cam so I could listen to a video on the way home (I do this a lot.) Combat was stale in part of this 5e session and it had my mind wandering. A bit bored, I started thinking up an RPG that uses cartoon physics more than real world ones. Anyway, I pull up TH-cam and see the thumbnail for this video. The small character proportions and sword and sorcery/sci-fi vibes of the art really spoke to me and the video seemed to be exactly what I needed, something about fixing D&D combat. During that trip home, listening to this video and thinking about the art, I came up with my own RPG concept. It's a cartoony, light-hearted adventuring game set in a science fantasy world with a lot of inspiration from 80s and 90s anime & jrpgs that were in turn inspired by old-school D&D. It's called Chibi Space Paladins and I've been working on it for about a year now in my spare time. It's not really an OSR game, but I took a lot principles I enjoy from those games and videos like yours have informed the design. I just saw this pop up on my TH-cam home page again and realized it was this entire video that started me down the path of making my own TTRPG, so I just wanted to say thank you! You also got me to explore BX D&D with my friends and I've been running some OSR games for us with some of B/X's procedural gameplay and some of your advice slotted in. So thank you again for making these videos, Daniel!
This is great advice, especially about setting player expectations for each session, so they know what they're in for that evening. Telegraphing combats sounds reasonable, realistic. I dm for only 3 players, so I do individual initiative, everyone rolling d6 and adding Dex bonus. Whoever rolls lower than the bad guys goes after them, everyone else before them in order. It really keeps it exciting. We enjoy the idea that even missile fire might take a while to "get a bead" on moving targets in a skirmish -- no one is just standing around waiting for their turn "to hit."
Great suggestions, Bandit! I love the 'narrative mass combat' idea! 5th Ed. combat boredxne to tears simply because it's nigh-impossible for Pcs to die, This sounds great at first-who wants their character to die? But in practice it drains all he tension out of a combat encounter. No tension, no excitement no danger, to the point I was dreading combat because it felt so hollow. If you enjoy 5th Ed. more power to you but it's definitely not my cup of tea.
These were awesome tips, Daniel! Thanks for putting this out. I switched to my own version of side-based initiative similar to your example where all the players declare what they want to do first and all actions are "locked in." Only after everyone decides their actions do the dice fall and determine what actually happens. Then I switch to the enemy side and same idea. I don't roll initiative each round since the custom system I run is already a bit swingy but I think everything you said was spot-on and great for any game master to use with their own system :)
Great points Daniel! It reminds me of boxing; when the punches flow there's excitement. Keep the momentum of the players attacks flowing fast around the table! I would add create doubt when players are losing hit points, fear when they are dying, and thrills when they show prowess! All by using a few simple descriptors. This engages players and informs them of their resource status: -"The Troll rips your arm wide open!" -"You begin shaking uncontrollably as the Orc plunges his dagger in your flesh!" -"The fighter dashes forward like a steeled panther and slashes his sword!"
I've been running OSE for like 8 months and you just made me realize why procedural combat fits so well. I didn't realize how slick it can be. I would love a video with more detail!
Mindset and purpose as meta game elements reminds me that metagaming seems to be misunderstood and unfairly suppressed imo. The meta elements are where players understand the game, form expectations and develop strategies for play. By contrast an emphasis on roleplaying "in character" often feels a lot more like improvisational theater than playing a "game".
Thanks Daniel! I love all of your videos and watch, mining for little rid bits to enhance my player’s experience at our table and I always find something. I’m going to bring up the “narrative minor combat” idea and see what they think. Now I’m switching to one of your actual plays to watch the combat scenes. Thanks! 💫
@@BanditsKeep any chance you will do a procedural B/X combat examples? I am still trying to wrap my head around encounters and combat and I know you would have the best examples for new players to learn!
Something to think about: RAW procedural combat raises the value of saves, AC, CON, and better HD, since they work whether or not your side won initiative. It also makes the two-handed weapon penalty occasionally a tactical benefit, since by "losing" initiative you will melee after the enemies take most of their actions. These things are intentional components of class balance, especially for fighters; and they reflect the design-as-written of the thief and magic user: using their superior movement to move behind their martial allies.
Really helpful ty. Let’s keep it fun! Sometimes the big set piece, sometimes the quick and simple, sometimes narrative. Telegraph to the players so their expectations are in line. Summarise at the end of each round of combat. Use morale (and I loved the earlier video) but also recognise that intelligent monsters will just run if the battle starts going against them. I would find a video on procedural combat helpful. Ty Daniel and look forward to details on Patreon etc
Implement morale rules. One orc left against a killer party will not pass morale. The game you play has the rules for procedural combat explained and if they don't then use a different rule set. There are many D&D clones that treat combat sensibly. Practice the combat sequence enough and understand the instances that slow combat down - an example is tied initiative. This will create any number of game instances that usually require the DM to decide what happens. In my opinion it is better to just have a home rule 'Re-roll ties'.
I don’t find ties slow, but it comes down to your group of course - One of my favorite rules for ties is that if there’s a tie you make a random monster check 😂 that comes from the Hateful place - and then re-roll.
Combat challenges used in the same way as Skill challenges from 4e. If the combat encounter is more trivial then don’t play it out round by round until bags of HP have been reduced to 0hp, play it as a skill challenge, monsters are just obstacles between the player and what they want/need to do, to move the story forward, so it works much like death saves from 5e, players have to roll a number of successes (usually the number of players in the party) before they accrue a number of failures (usually 3), they can use any skill including attack rolls, but each player can only use a specific skill once, other players may use the same skill. It engages the whole party, everyone gets to contribute something to overcome the encounter, they have to think creatively instead of just attacks, there’s a timescale to the encounter, there are stakes to the combat, as well as rewards for completing the challenge. Throw x20 raiding goblins at the party of characters, if they get 3 successes first, then the goblins scatter, retreat and regroup, if they accrue 3 failures first then the party is overrun and captured or the goblins raid some loot off them and then scatter along with their loot. If the encounter involves a boss or an important NPC then they arrive at 3 failures, roll initiative and switch to round by round. How many minions can they dispatch before the boss gets involved, easily judged by their number of successes. How many dark crystals can they destroy before the cultist concludes his summoning ritual? Combat doesn’t have to be a slog to the death.
I love this video. It seems like some games/styles have 10 minutes of fun in 60-minute combats, and other games/styles have 5 minutes of fun in 10-minute combats, and the challenge is finding how to cut the excess without cutting fun. This is a really helpful video to help learn how to do that.
I'm really enjoying your content, and I like how you present it. I give a lot of thought to length of combat. I don't like when combat drags on. Thanks for the video.
Great video and one of the best advice I've seen on this subject. Also I laughed at the 'volcano' mention lol. It does feel like people online are saying every fight should be a mega-show. How much prep would that require for a whole megadungeon? Insane.
Great points! You always have the angle almost no one is covering. I'd be really interested in a video on BX combat procedure. Clear, instructional and inspiring as your videos tend to be. Maybe also a little on how you use those principles as I understood in other systems like 5e.
@@BanditsKeep Yeah. Without forgetting going relatively close to raw BX/OSE which I'm trying to learn (again..? Though what we played back in the BECMI days was a loose interpretation 😁). But in any case curious about your interpretation and thoughts.
Absolutely going to use the player's "narrate the win" option for my hex crawl for encounters that are easy wins. I'm going to tweak it / add a little to the idea by awarding EXP based on how good the role play narration is. My players are uncomfortable still with role play and this might help them get into character a bit. Two birds one stone with this idea. Thanks! Was already trying to do procedural combat but didn't know to express it to the players. Didn't even have a name for it. Now I do. Melee, missile, spell, other. Awesome.
Do a procedurally generated video as soon as possible please. I'm very intrigued by this system, its my first time hearing of it and I would like to know more.
Would love to see a video of procedural combat. I just found your channel and am looking forward to the rest of your content! (Found you on the video about skilled players, thanks Flutes Loot)
In my system of choice (GURPS), the way that players are kept engaged outside their own turns is that they have opportunities for reactive action (when attacked by something avoidable like a typical weapon, PCs get what's effectively a Reflex Save in D&D terms to avoid taking damage). Technically opening the game up for "more rolling" does make combat take longer, but also makes it more interactive. If your character doesn't have a good opportunity to attack, you can spend your turn All-Out Defending, which gives a bonus to those rolls for dodging, blocking, and parrying - thus a turn of not doing something proactive like an attack or a spell is still not "wasted", which in turn makes players less afraid to do it (it's more helpful on more fragile characters, too). Further, there's the option of risk and reward to actively forego your dodges and blocks between now and your next turn, extending yourself in an All-Out Attack for bonus damage or bonus hit chance.
Excellent video, and the first I've seen from you, so a sub it is! Ultimately, no one who's invested in the table's growing narrative is super interested in the small combats. Sure, there are days where everyone's tired and they just wanna murder-hobo and that's fine! I've never been a big "D&D" gamer (came to the hobby through Deadlands in the 90s), but the OSR has been really fun to dive into, there's so much creativity all over it. To the point I'm writing my own system. I s'pose we all gotta write our heartbreaker at some point, don't we? Something I wanted to incorporate right from the outset is basically "Procedural" conflict of any kind, on almost any scale, for when players don't want to/can't engage with it in detail or aren't aware of it. I admire the way Savage Worlds has done this over the years, making a couple of very clever subsystems that can proceduralize almost anything from a fairly insignificant combat, to a full blown heist, dungeon crawl, or military campaign. This has a nice side benefit of being a fun mini-game the GM can play with themselves in their prep time to move along the machinations in the setting, and having them be affected by PC actions if it's something they're engaging with. When you can do this inside a lighter system, you've got a nicely streamlined narrative engine that's relatively easy and fun for the GM to keep up with, isn't pure fiat, and gives the players a living and vibrant setting to do their thing in. I'm looking forward to watching your other videos, and here's another vote for "Yes, Procedural Combat video, please!". Sorry for the verbosity, and thanks for the thought that's been provoked!
@@BanditsKeep It's my go to for anything that isn't "Hit Points and Classes" fantasy, cos sometimes that's what you want! If you pick it up, I hope you can mine some useful stuff out of it!
Thank you! Your videos have been very useful to me, as I am designing a game based on the Rules Cyclopedia. Your output is clear and understandable, and gives ideas. Keep up the Good Work 👌👍👏👏👏🤚
That clarifying summary before closing out the round I find absolutely necessary to keep order but it breaks immersion for some people and I get that but I need it to be sure everyone’s where they planned to be
Great video dude. Agree that you don’t need a bunch of crazy stuff to spice up combats and to end it short when the monsters are outnumbered. I run 5e, albeit a home brewed version that’s trying to be more old school. I’d love to hear how you run procedural/side initiative as it sounds right up my alley.
I'm attacking 🤔 But seriously, I only run seriously strategic combat when a "certain player" isn't there because I know he hates it haha, which is fine, good old hack and slash session Boring is subjective to each player You make excellent points as always Daniel :)
I frankly love procedural combat. I am especially enamored of the system from ASSH. I do use a couple of combat hacks though to make certain choices mean more. Specifically weapon choices. Reach weapons interrupt movement towards a character. Not a free attack, it just bumps them up in the initiative order. Readied range weapons, like a loaded crossbow or a bow go first in a round. Hurled weapons and slings go on the standard position. Short weapons like daggers and saps are interrupted by normal sized weapons like a mace. I use 10 second rounds so movement or action are the options. As I run mostly 1 on 1 games I don't wipe out spells for an interrupted spell, but it does give incentive to keep a staff or wand around as they are like pulling a trigger and work in early parts of the procedure. I dont' have all of it in front of me, but you can get the idea I am sure. I also don't want, as the DM of a single character and a couple henchmen, want to roll for every single kobold, so I group them up into mobs. A drag arse combat is a downer, so I will have enemies disengage toss down their caltrops or treasure and flee when it is appropriate. Not everything has to be a moral check, as I believe you mentioned.
Ok, I usually have no problem with combat, but that summary thing .. I have heared that the second time now. I will give this a try next session. I think this could make a positive difference. Thank you, Daniel! :) Also I want to add: Patreon is fine but me personally am not interested in mailing lists, social media, discord and so on.
IN our Pathfinder campaign, we used to roll initiative every turn, but that caused spells to be worthless(hold person at end of round, but target making their save at the beginning of the next round), we ended up rerolling initiative every 5 rounds!
I find that shifting all rolls onto the player side of the table really helps people stay engaged. When you tell someone "Roll to dodge the Orc's attack" it makes them feel more in control and invested than just rolling the die yourself, and telling them damage. I run a system that is kinda hacked together using the stat-pools from Monte Cook's Cipher system, so it's even more engaging when that player can make decisions about what resources to spend (or not spend) to dodge that attack.
This seems very similar to segments. I had a thought to roll initiative when it mattered with the participants for each melee separate. The ranger shooting his bow doesn’t roll initiative for the melee he’s not in. I kinda don’t like that people don’t just move at the same time in some systems. Enemies win initiative and can close distance and hit you before you get a chance to react. Players should have the ability to engage or avoid and it helps add another level of decision. Just a trap where you run enemies into an ambush is difficult in modern games.
wow. Thanks for this Daniel. I guess since I've been running the same 2E campaign now for 30 years you'd probably say I'm 'OSR' and so, a lot of what you describe here just seems second nature to me but, the way you explain it and organize it is fantastic. I've analyzed 5E to the end and back and can easily see how combat could get boring.
09:01 - Checking out the Post-Melee Morale tabulation on p. 15 of my copy of Chainmail, averaging the 4 PCs and 2 remaining Orcs out as Heavy Foot and averaging the d6 for winning combat to 3.5 - that results in a Morale difference of 12 - doubling to 24 because the combat involved fewer than 20 figures. On a 24? The losing side retreats! So I don't *want* to say, "Everyone should read Chainmail," but... ;-)
Some ideas I've toyed with involve things cribbed from video games, like: All-Out Attack (Persona series) - If every enemy is incapacitated, the party can skip rolling for initiative and roll for damage all at once. The rolls are added up, averaged out by the number of enemies, and dealt as Force damage to all enemies. Chain Attack Multiplier (Xenoblade Chronicles) - A d6 is placed on the table, with 1 facing up. Each time a PC lands a hit, the d6 is switched up one number, and the next successful attack by a PC has its damage multiplied by that number, up to 6, whereas a miss "resets" the d6.
I have run a BX game for nearly 3 years now and I have also found the morale works against the flow of the game and the rotation of misses can be an issue
Love your coat sequence, even though I prefer spell before missiles, cause i like magic being an extention of will, therefore faster than any other action that requires lifting a sword or aimin at a target, for example. My reference scene is when gandalf the white block aragaron legolas and gimly in one shot because he's boss ahahaha
I think the key is describing ie role playing. If the DM can describe the PCs slashing and the goblins blocking and parrying that is so much better than “I attack, 13.” “You miss. Next” . If you can set the example then the players will hopefully start describing too, all it takes for it to be fun is using any other verb than “attack”. Will try your procedural combat to see how that plays out. Seems mostly moving the descriptions to the end of the round. Not sure I have that much RAM in board.
How to make combat interesting and NOT a boring chore: 1) Narrate Narrate Narrate!! 2) be loose on the rules. 3) don't make every enemy a boss-like Warrior. Narration : Combat MUST be cinematic. I mean we all love action combat scenes and that's what makes us be in a great fighting game. If your fighting scene is like "roll your dice. OK you hit for x-dice damage or you miss, take x-dice wounds" or something the players feels like they are doing math. But if you say "tell me what you want to do and roll dice." Then depending on success or failure narrate what happened. "You swing your battle axe while running towards the orc warrior. He tries to give you a powerful hit with his hammer but with a swift move you avoid the blow. Dirt and stones are shattered around while the hammer hits the ground. And with a fast slash you cut the Orc's body from shoulder to belly. Thick blood and guts are spread all over while the Orc falls to the ground biting the dust for the last time." Loose rules: Don't make every fight a war simulation. Sometimes strict rules can be tiresome and bothering. Who cares if you're 10 meters away or 15? Make a combat zone of 3 areas. Far, Close, Face to face. In a far distance spell and missile users can act first maybe twice. In close they can act once. And in face to face fighting is melee and simultaneous. Don't count seconds and turns by the "clock" but by your logic and loosely. Hard or easy fights: Depending on the enemy make fights ending in a few turns. You fight inferior enemies. Kill in one hit. Don't count hit points. You fight superior enemies. Give the fight about 3-5 turns. Or less. If the enemy is too hard the player should act accordingly and not try to beat the odds by a lucky dice roll. But give the players a chance of a way out to a difficult situation even at their "last moment before death". But don't be loose on the consequences.
As a martial pugilist, procedural combat feels real. I know how long it takes my foe to take certain actions. I see when I can act first, interrupt or when he’s got me on speed so I need power and accuracy. Even “the ol one two” is a procedural action in combat
Combat for the Tunnels & Trolls system is really abstract and only becomes granular if the players want to do something creative. Very simply, the players all roll their dice for damage and the GM rolls for the monster's damage. Each subtracts their result from the other's hit points. At this point, each side rolls fewer and fewer dice (depending on how much HP they have remaining) until one is eliminated or flees. I ran a T&T game with a bunch of AD&D veterans and they were gobsmacked by how fast and simple it was. They had options if they wanted to use them but they were also glad to be able to run 5 fights AND explore the dungeon to its end in a single session.
I still use individual initiative because an app I use makes it very easy to set up quickly. If I ever had to stop using that app I'm abandoning it for group initiative lol
Thanks a lot Daniel for the great video! I have to admit, as a rpg newbie who has only played D&D 5e, I'm having trouble understanding exactly how procedural combat plays out. Is it the GM who at each round determines who goes when, depending on the actions people declare? That's how I understood it from the video at least. An example would be amazing.
yes, the order of combat is based on the actions, if two people are doing the same thing, typically the players decide the order of their actions. Two PCs attacking an ogre - one wants to tackle them, the other stab them with a spear - they would have the “tackler” go first so the spearman gets advantage (assuming the ogre goes down).
Iv found that if i make my combat encounters important to the narritive or theres an objective to it, like saving or protecting the hostages or retreating from an ambush that you have no way of winning gets my players more invested and talking with echother to plan moves and strategies. Just last weekend i had all 8 of them exploring a mad scientist lair and they stumbled into his trap of 40 mutated humans that were no stronger then normal towns folk but because the lab was already set to flood once the support pillars fell in a few minutes it made the whole experience adrenaline pumping for everyone. Me included
Hey, Daniel! Great video, excellent points on length of combat, etc. I feel like this is starting to get closer to your podcast topic of your ongoing hack of Chainmail. You tend to make reference to many things in how your table runs. Is there one of your Actual Play posts that you feel is a good example of this stuff? I'd maybe go so fast as to recommend posting one of them to your podcast feed as well..
@@BanditsKeep I've found a few of your older Od&d hack APs and I have listened to several of your APs through the adventures you designed "on screen". Just wondered if there was one you'd recommend to me and your other acolytes.
Excellent advice. Players make combat boring by making enemies bags of hit points. They should be roleplaying in combat (not roll-playing) and attempting maneuvers. Players need to pay attention when it's not their turn, and be ready when it is their turn. As DM, I use theater of the mind for easier combats. I also narrate some combats, especially the end of an easy win. Temper this with knowing your table. Some people really like to finish off the combatants. I use scatter terrain to keep it simple. The battle board is only for important combats. Side initiative is very deadly if all the enemies get to go first and it's a challenging combat. We use individual initiative and it works well when everyone is paying attention. Players have to be familiar with their abilities and how they work, and I try to be as well. Nose out of books, no arguing (unless I contradict the rules), move the spotlight if it linger son a player for too long.
Oh and the resource question for 5e is a fair one. I particularly make goodberry consume its material component, then have them search for said material component if they want it. I think its a sprig of mistletoe.... But if you tell your players that it works this way, and that resource consumption is important; they will act accordingly. The specific ruling I've used is that to have a long rest they must eat and drink something, while to have a short rest they must either eat or drink something. I don't make that something specific, or a specific amount, and I only implement these things if after I bring it up the players at my table think its cool. Sometimes they do, other times they don't. When they do, just scavenging for food has been fun for my players especially when they go out of the way to describe how they cook it or how their character eats it.
A thing I’ve been playing with is reverse procedural combat. So, lowest initiative describes their move fist, highest goes last. This rewards players that roll high with more information. Another thing, which has been getting mixed responses, is to allow players to change their action in response to what happens during a particular resolution, but it has to be made immediately after that resolution.
My take: One approach doesnt fit all situations. Individual initiative is likely better for set piece battles. Procedural is better for resource drain battles. Free narration is better for "flavor combat". Unfortunately I have yet to see a system actually embracing such a tiering by providing a system suitable for all 3. For instance 5ed bonus action and reaction systems are designed for individual initiative in a way that can make it awkward to run a purist procedural combat with certain characters that is buildt around these systems.
I hope you can make the video on procedural combat. I listened to your description twice and I don't see how it will be faster than using initiative. Even if they decide melee or spell ahead of time, they would still have to target, roll dice, and resolve.
I’m trying to figure out a way to film it where you would actually see how fast it is, me explaining it is not going to be fast with her I was explaining this or standard initiative
Combat encounters as they should be! Daniel a toast to another great video!!! You reminded me what it is that I have been missing. Time to tell them to not look at their character sheet and just tell me what they are doing.
On Tuesday night my players spent 3 hours fighting a dracoiich head to head. By the end of it they were almost dead, the shield guardian was crushed, their hoverskiff was wrecked, the tank's power armor (ala barrier peaks) was trashed and they killed it...not really killed, but defeated. The battle felt good. Everyone walked away feeling like they did something. I gave them level 12. Good times.
Have you done a video all about "procedural combat" ? Especially for how you did it for your 5E gaming. I liked what you had to say - but not enough time spent on how you adjudicate this. Would love to hear more - since I too think individual initiative takes too long.
DM, " Party of orcs and PC surprise each other at a tunnel cross junction, roll for initiative actions." My rogue gains highest initiative so I kneel and throw out dice and gambling trade goods. Remember most patrol guards are bored and pass the time by playing dice. DM, " Roll body language charisma check to see if any of the patrol guards follow you lead." Chaotics are less likely to have strict patrols and shirk their duties to play dice. Orcs and drow may very well shoot dice, hobgoblins may do belly to the ground to arm wrestle as strength challenge as a precursor to diplomacy checks. It is easier to talk/trade your way into a camp to scout the numbers then hack & slash murder hobo your way, depending on the DM. You could just kill off a drow outpost patrol or trade your way into drow political intrigue for better magic items and a greater story.
Never heard of procedural combat before. sounds helpful for cutting down wasted time from regular initiative. I'm not sure if it's something my players would like, I might see if I can use it in tandem with a grid map and make a sort of hybrid method.
I generally like and agree with all your points in this video, however I play almost exclusively in systems like 5e, Starfinder, and Pathfinder 2e, and in those systems the older style of, "Declare spells>Movement>Missile>Spells are cast>Melee" or similar, would require a complete 80% to 100% overhaul of all the combat rules. Save that section of the video being for lack of a better work, useless, I quite like this. I may watch more of your content over the next few days.
Thanks- I used this same concept when I ran 5e - not the exact procedure but the “what are you doing” and then the action and it worked fine for my table for a long campaign up to 13th level. It does take a few sessions to “kick in” Of course
Both sides rolling d6 (or d10 if you're a 2E person) each round for initiative is great. 100% agree. I've found that having side initiative is enough to speed up the combat, though. Last year, I tried doing declarations at the start of each round, and phased rounds (move/missile/magic/melee) like the books say, but even simple declarations slowed things down a bit. These days, I just have the sides roll, and then go around the table when the players' side is up. Keeps things rolling, and usually my 8 year old son is the only one who slows things down, as he's thinking of something creative or funny to do rather than just attack.
@@BanditsKeep I do like your idea of having the players just state the general action/phase they intend. My players were trying to tell me everything during declaration, then having to tell me again when it was actually their turn.
Yes! Side based initiative every round makes D&D combat sooooooo much better and faster. You also cut out everybody hemming and hawing when it gets to their turn. Every turn. That is soooo sloooow.
something I've started doing with combats that are meaningless are weaving some sort of narrative into it that could make it not even a combat. a simple recent example was the party running into a bear as a random encounter that would've been a push over. so instead I had them run into a hunter (who was from the town they're going to) pursuing a bear which turned into an argument and a social encounter and the bear smacking someone and running off which was much more interesting than melting down a bear in half a turn
Is procedural combat similar to side the side inititiative they talk about in the 5e DMG? I've always wanted to try it. Seems like it would be very engaging but I think it might take slightly longer. However because it forces people to all think as a group I think it might be faster because they know as soon as the monster's go they'll have to get another round of activity ready to input. Thank you for sharing your insights.
Yes, I believe it is similar- I found (when I used it in 5e) at first combat slowed down as the group got used to it, but in the end it was faster than individual at my table.
Maybe I'm missing something but procedural combat sounds like it's more of a headache to try and keep everyone's actions straight rather than standard initiative. Also I found it funny that in almost every example of making combat faster involves spellcasters skipping their turn or not having a turn before all the enemies are defeated. :) Otherwise solid advice (outside of procedural combat - I don't see the point or how it's going to speed things up).
It speeds things up because the players must make a (general) choice before they see what everyone else does. Spellcasters should not always cat spells IMO and they should not feel bad that they “can’t do anything” was my point. Of course if you are playing in a game with cantrips that is not the case.
@@BanditsKeep How do you keep track of player choices at the start of each round and how do you stop players from planning out their entire turn in advance since they are declaring actions simultaneously? Also, if two players want to both swing in melee for example, how do you determine which of them gets to roll and resolve first? Genuinely curious, just trying to understand the advantage of procedural combat and how it plays out at the table.
I use the opposite of your "narrate it" technique. I tell the players that they come across some orcs and then tell them how the orcs successfully slaughter and disembowel them.
I haven't tried this method before but it sounds interesting. One thing I have heard and tried, which seemed to work for my group, was using a timer. a 10 second timer to replicate their in-game combat time. I think it helps people think for their upcoming turn because they cant ponder their actions or discuss their coordinated moves during the 10s, they have to know beforehand. Of course, if the rolling itself goes over 10s that's not a problem, just making the decision and talking to other PC's. Curious if you've tried this and your thoughts on it?
I personally just implimented a timer for the first time: 2 minutes to each side (we've got minions/hirelings that draws out combat more) and it worked really well for us. I use FoundryVTT, so it had a visual timer with a ticking sound for the "critical" last 30 seconds. For the first time, I didn't punish anyone for going over time, but did offer a bonus to looting if they never went over. Even though me, the DM, and our necromancer didn't always stick within the 2 minutes, it really helped push us to move much faster. It made combat feel more frantic, more urgent, more intense. Both I and my players made "mistakes", or at least tactically sub-par moves for the sake of moving faster, which feels realistic and dramatic. It also showed us there was a lot of room to improve our personal skill as well! I highly recommend it. Figit with timing/consequences so it fits your group, but I don't think I'll ever go back to un-timed combat now!
I would also add that you should make sure to dress the room a bit. You don't need anything super elaborate for every combat, but even just putting in some furniture or whatever else can go a long way, especially for fighters. I've found there's nothing more boring than combat in an otherwise empty room, playing a character who's only real options are to make normal weapon attacks every round, especially in systems where spell casters are able to cast spells basically every round. Being able to incorporate things in the room into attacks really helps to create those exciting cinematic moments that make the fight interesting. Throw people through tables! Hit people with chairs! Push people down the stairs! Set barrels on fire! Shove people into fire pits! Swing from chandeliers! You get the idea. (Also, as a DM I would make doing things like that be at least as useful as just making a weapon attack, regardless of the rules. A lot of systems, such as 5e, make it so it's almost never worthwhile to make more interesting attacks, since they typically do little to no damage and most effects, such as prone, rarely hinder enemies in any meaningful way.)
A fight is exciting until it's clearly decided who will win, not until all enemy are dead. Movies teach us wrong things. Many underlings in reality won't be loyal to a shitty boss until death like in John Wick. Russian soldiers are currently deserting or running for their lives or fight forced by their own officers. So when 30 street ruffians surround 4 awesome heroes, who take out 10 with ease, the rest will run. And why die for Lord Evil, who is in the habit of killing underlings for mistakes? Some heroes entering the scene is the right moment for desertion and leave the heroes to have their boss fight. Even monsters might be mothers with a kid somewhere. If the heroes clearly aren't snack, then run. Large scale medieval battles show the same pattern: one fights the battle as long as there is believe one can win. If that is lost, run to fight another day.
Please do a video about combat procedure. I always use individual initiative, each round, to help keep the chaos which is combat. My players are quick on their feet so there isn't lag on their turn. BECMI, or 5e RAW initiative is far too predictable for me. Anyway, thanks for the great video again and keep the dice rolling!
I shall whip up a video - thanks!
This would be great! I’d love to know your procedure. Personally we don’t roll initiative (I know that’s taboo). I have 8 guys in my group (6-7 play on average). I have everyone’s speed predetermined and we rocket through rounds. I also dropped the M-M-M-M procedure because it too slow for a group that big. You just declare what you’re doing and do it. If you can’t decide I move on and come back to you at the end of the round. I clocked a battle with 7 characters vs 10 goblins two weeks ago and we were clearing rounds in about a minute each. Also as Dungeon Craft says higher hit points = slower combat.
@@williamobraidislee3433 HP bloat is such a slog. 😆 So true. Love me some PDM.
@@Grimlore82 haha yeah he’s hardcore on pace. I borrowed a version of how he does HP. My characters start with HP = constitution score but only get between 1 and 4 HP +con adjustment depending on class up to 9th level and then nothing else. So the max hit points even a 15th level fighter with 18 constitution could ever have is 67. A 15th level magic user with say 12 con could only ever have is 20! Increases low-level survivability at the expense of long term invincibility.
@@BanditsKeep Excellent! I am looking forward to it! Perhaps reworking Morgan Ironwolf and the gang!
Great video! Slogging through a 45 minute battle with goblins can be grueling. Having a 4 hour battle with Vecna can be exciting the whole time.
For sure
A "4 hour battle"?
No enemy deserves that time of our lifes.
30 minutes are enough for the most difficult enemy imo.
What version are you playing?
100% agree on procedural combat and group initiative every round. The summary at end of every round is intermittently used.
Cool
I naturally am doing the summary at the end of the round - I find that it helps me the DM remember what the hell is going on :)
Just found the channel for the first time with this video and I already love this take on combat. Don't think I've heard one like it. Please do the combat example you were mentioning, I'll take all the opportunities to learn that I can get!
Thanks 🙏🏻 welcome aboard
I have heard 3-5 rounds of combat is the sweet spot, especially in OSR games, and I think there is a lot of truth to that.
That does seem about right
I honestly have problems getting combats that last more than that, lol
I would love a video on combat procedure. These videos have been really great helping me hone my DM skills.
Awesome, will do
I actually prefer procedural combat, but it certainly stomps on a ton of character builds. I think it would work, but you would need a group that doesn't mind a ton of homebrew. I think one of the big factors in fights taking longer is both sides have huge numbers of hit points to chew through. Great vid.
More HP can definitely make it take longer - why would procedural mess with builds?
I love this! And it makes me feel validated in my own technique. Why the combat happens is a big deal to me, and I advocate for my players to be sure that they want to engage the supposed enemy. If there is no reason for the players to engage I'd rather simply gloss over it. I've had npcs bandits try to bribe the adventurers to leave them alone(which works way more than it should) or I've told them that they catch some creatures hiding from them or trying too. I've never considered directly asking them how do they win in moments when they would clearly win, and I'm going to now. But I focus and want my players to focus on the objective. If the point isn't to kill orcs we don't need to do so if orcs show up. And what the NPCs are up to upon the players approach is important to me, one of my favorite is the Obvious Trap; a group of creatures have trapped a place specifically to get NPCs that aren't cool enough to simply notice the troggs and their log trap. They then try to solve getting past these troggs as a puzzle instead of a simple combat.
I learned in 4th edition that players are destined to ruin any setpiece anything; the events of the game gotta be able to ebb and flow to their actions or whims. I'm also fond of directly warning a player when their actions would make a npc want to attack them, which either changes their direct actions or makes them launch their attack first.
And ultimately the more information the players have the smarter, and more interesting decisions they will make in both the social aspects of the game, and the combative ones.
Well said!
" I'm also fond of directly warning a player when their actions would make a npc want to attack them, which either changes their direct actions or makes them launch their attack first." 😂😂
Player, "I poke the sleeping owlbear."
GM, "It will attack you."
Player, "I poke the sleeping owlbear with the entire length of my sword. Poke! Poke! Poke!"
Wow- I really appreciate this video. The ideas here, I haven’t heard from others, and it makes me look at combat in a whole new way. It makes combat “zoom-able” to its level of importance- and to its level of importance in the game, not necessarily in the story. I’ll be rewatching this video, and keeping more notes.
Thanks 😊
Great conversation :) And yes would like a video regarding combat procedure.
Thanks
Bit of a long story, but you might find it interesting. One night, I was leaving a D&D session and I pulled up TH-cam so I could listen to a video on the way home (I do this a lot.) Combat was stale in part of this 5e session and it had my mind wandering. A bit bored, I started thinking up an RPG that uses cartoon physics more than real world ones. Anyway, I pull up TH-cam and see the thumbnail for this video. The small character proportions and sword and sorcery/sci-fi vibes of the art really spoke to me and the video seemed to be exactly what I needed, something about fixing D&D combat. During that trip home, listening to this video and thinking about the art, I came up with my own RPG concept. It's a cartoony, light-hearted adventuring game set in a science fantasy world with a lot of inspiration from 80s and 90s anime & jrpgs that were in turn inspired by old-school D&D.
It's called Chibi Space Paladins and I've been working on it for about a year now in my spare time. It's not really an OSR game, but I took a lot principles I enjoy from those games and videos like yours have informed the design. I just saw this pop up on my TH-cam home page again and realized it was this entire video that started me down the path of making my own TTRPG, so I just wanted to say thank you! You also got me to explore BX D&D with my friends and I've been running some OSR games for us with some of B/X's procedural gameplay and some of your advice slotted in. So thank you again for making these videos, Daniel!
That's awesome! If you make the game available for the public at some point, please share it, sounds fun!
So, to sum up this video - “it’s not about the length but what you can do with it” - ha! Couldn’t resist that. Thanks for the interesting video.
I’ve heard that before 😂
This is great advice, especially about setting player expectations for each session, so they know what they're in for that evening. Telegraphing combats sounds reasonable, realistic. I dm for only 3 players, so I do individual initiative, everyone rolling d6 and adding Dex bonus. Whoever rolls lower than the bad guys goes after them, everyone else before them in order. It really keeps it exciting. We enjoy the idea that even missile fire might take a while to "get a bead" on moving targets in a skirmish -- no one is just standing around waiting for their turn "to hit."
For sure
Great suggestions, Bandit! I love the 'narrative mass combat' idea! 5th Ed. combat boredxne to tears simply because it's nigh-impossible for Pcs to die, This sounds great at first-who wants their character to die? But in practice it drains all he tension out of a combat encounter. No tension, no excitement no danger, to the point I was dreading combat because it felt so hollow. If you enjoy 5th Ed. more power to you but it's definitely not my cup of tea.
Thanks 😊
These were awesome tips, Daniel! Thanks for putting this out. I switched to my own version of side-based initiative similar to your example where all the players declare what they want to do first and all actions are "locked in." Only after everyone decides their actions do the dice fall and determine what actually happens. Then I switch to the enemy side and same idea. I don't roll initiative each round since the custom system I run is already a bit swingy but I think everything you said was spot-on and great for any game master to use with their own system :)
Awesome
Great points Daniel! It reminds me of boxing; when the punches flow there's excitement.
Keep the momentum of the players attacks flowing fast around the table!
I would add create doubt when players are losing hit points, fear when they are dying, and thrills when they show prowess!
All by using a few simple descriptors. This engages players and informs them of their resource status:
-"The Troll rips your arm wide open!" -"You begin shaking uncontrollably as the Orc plunges his dagger in your flesh!"
-"The fighter dashes forward like a steeled panther and slashes his sword!"
Nice
I've been running OSE for like 8 months and you just made me realize why procedural combat fits so well. I didn't realize how slick it can be. I would love a video with more detail!
Awesome
Mindset and purpose as meta game elements reminds me that metagaming seems to be misunderstood and unfairly suppressed imo. The meta elements are where players understand the game, form expectations and develop strategies for play.
By contrast an emphasis on roleplaying "in character" often feels a lot more like improvisational theater than playing a "game".
I tend to agree
I love my improv theatre 👊
Thanks Daniel! I love all of your videos and watch, mining for little rid bits to enhance my player’s experience at our table and I always find something. I’m going to bring up the “narrative minor combat” idea and see what they think. Now I’m switching to one of your actual plays to watch the combat scenes. Thanks! 💫
Thank You!
Your channel is hands down the best osr channel, so many gems you share freely!!!
Thank You!
@@BanditsKeep any chance you will do a procedural B/X combat examples? I am still trying to wrap my head around encounters and combat and I know you would have the best examples for new players to learn!
Something to think about: RAW procedural combat raises the value of saves, AC, CON, and better HD, since they work whether or not your side won initiative. It also makes the two-handed weapon penalty occasionally a tactical benefit, since by "losing" initiative you will melee after the enemies take most of their actions. These things are intentional components of class balance, especially for fighters; and they reflect the design-as-written of the thief and magic user: using their superior movement to move behind their martial allies.
Indeed
Really helpful ty. Let’s keep it fun! Sometimes the big set piece, sometimes the quick and simple, sometimes narrative. Telegraph to the players so their expectations are in line. Summarise at the end of each round of combat. Use morale (and I loved the earlier video) but also recognise that intelligent monsters will just run if the battle starts going against them. I would find a video on procedural combat helpful. Ty Daniel and look forward to details on Patreon etc
Thanks
Implement morale rules. One orc left against a killer party will not pass morale. The game you play has the rules for procedural combat explained and if they don't then use a different rule set. There are many D&D clones that treat combat sensibly. Practice the combat sequence enough and understand the instances that slow combat down - an example is tied initiative. This will create any number of game instances that usually require the DM to decide what happens. In my opinion it is better to just have a home rule 'Re-roll ties'.
I don’t find ties slow, but it comes down to your group of course - One of my favorite rules for ties is that if there’s a tie you make a random monster check 😂 that comes from the Hateful place - and then re-roll.
@@BanditsKeep If the initiative works just as well with a tie roll, then why even roll initiative? Just do the turns.
Combat challenges used in the same way as Skill challenges from 4e. If the combat encounter is more trivial then don’t play it out round by round until bags of HP have been reduced to 0hp, play it as a skill challenge, monsters are just obstacles between the player and what they want/need to do, to move the story forward, so it works much like death saves from 5e, players have to roll a number of successes (usually the number of players in the party) before they accrue a number of failures (usually 3), they can use any skill including attack rolls, but each player can only use a specific skill once, other players may use the same skill. It engages the whole party, everyone gets to contribute something to overcome the encounter, they have to think creatively instead of just attacks, there’s a timescale to the encounter, there are stakes to the combat, as well as rewards for completing the challenge.
Throw x20 raiding goblins at the party of characters, if they get 3 successes first, then the goblins scatter, retreat and regroup, if they accrue 3 failures first then the party is overrun and captured or the goblins raid some loot off them and then scatter along with their loot.
If the encounter involves a boss or an important NPC then they arrive at 3 failures, roll initiative and switch to round by round. How many minions can they dispatch before the boss gets involved, easily judged by their number of successes. How many dark crystals can they destroy before the cultist concludes his summoning ritual? Combat doesn’t have to be a slog to the death.
Sounds fun!
I love this video. It seems like some games/styles have 10 minutes of fun in 60-minute combats, and other games/styles have 5 minutes of fun in 10-minute combats, and the challenge is finding how to cut the excess without cutting fun. This is a really helpful video to help learn how to do that.
For sure
I'm really enjoying your content, and I like how you present it. I give a lot of thought to length of combat. I don't like when combat drags on. Thanks for the video.
Thank You!
Great video and one of the best advice I've seen on this subject. Also I laughed at the 'volcano' mention lol. It does feel like people online are saying every fight should be a mega-show. How much prep would that require for a whole megadungeon? Insane.
🌋
Great points! You always have the angle almost no one is covering. I'd be really interested in a video on BX combat procedure. Clear, instructional and inspiring as your videos tend to be. Maybe also a little on how you use those principles as I understood in other systems like 5e.
Thanks! Yes using them in other systems would be an important point it seems based on some of the comments here.
@@BanditsKeep Yeah. Without forgetting going relatively close to raw BX/OSE which I'm trying to learn (again..? Though what we played back in the BECMI days was a loose interpretation 😁). But in any case curious about your interpretation and thoughts.
Absolutely going to use the player's "narrate the win" option for my hex crawl for encounters that are easy wins. I'm going to tweak it / add a little to the idea by awarding EXP based on how good the role play narration is. My players are uncomfortable still with role play and this might help them get into character a bit. Two birds one stone with this idea. Thanks!
Was already trying to do procedural combat but didn't know to express it to the players. Didn't even have a name for it. Now I do. Melee, missile, spell, other. Awesome.
Awesome! I like that XP idea
Do a procedurally generated video as soon as possible please. I'm very intrigued by this system, its my first time hearing of it and I would like to know more.
Cool, I shall
I want an example of a procedural combat! 😀
From 1e? Are you casting a spell? 😝
@@BanditsKeep yes, Charm TH-cam Creator
Love the use of the old Wizards movie art for the thumbnail!
Thanks, such a great movie
@@BanditsKeep Definitely my favourite of Bakshi’s works and one of the most interesting animated fantasy movies of all time, imo
Would love to see a video of procedural combat. I just found your channel and am looking forward to the rest of your content! (Found you on the video about skilled players, thanks Flutes Loot)
Excellent, welcome!
In my system of choice (GURPS), the way that players are kept engaged outside their own turns is that they have opportunities for reactive action (when attacked by something avoidable like a typical weapon, PCs get what's effectively a Reflex Save in D&D terms to avoid taking damage). Technically opening the game up for "more rolling" does make combat take longer, but also makes it more interactive. If your character doesn't have a good opportunity to attack, you can spend your turn All-Out Defending, which gives a bonus to those rolls for dodging, blocking, and parrying - thus a turn of not doing something proactive like an attack or a spell is still not "wasted", which in turn makes players less afraid to do it (it's more helpful on more fragile characters, too). Further, there's the option of risk and reward to actively forego your dodges and blocks between now and your next turn, extending yourself in an All-Out Attack for bonus damage or bonus hit chance.
Excellent video, and the first I've seen from you, so a sub it is! Ultimately, no one who's invested in the table's growing narrative is super interested in the small combats. Sure, there are days where everyone's tired and they just wanna murder-hobo and that's fine! I've never been a big "D&D" gamer (came to the hobby through Deadlands in the 90s), but the OSR has been really fun to dive into, there's so much creativity all over it. To the point I'm writing my own system. I s'pose we all gotta write our heartbreaker at some point, don't we?
Something I wanted to incorporate right from the outset is basically "Procedural" conflict of any kind, on almost any scale, for when players don't want to/can't engage with it in detail or aren't aware of it. I admire the way Savage Worlds has done this over the years, making a couple of very clever subsystems that can proceduralize almost anything from a fairly insignificant combat, to a full blown heist, dungeon crawl, or military campaign. This has a nice side benefit of being a fun mini-game the GM can play with themselves in their prep time to move along the machinations in the setting, and having them be affected by PC actions if it's something they're engaging with. When you can do this inside a lighter system, you've got a nicely streamlined narrative engine that's relatively easy and fun for the GM to keep up with, isn't pure fiat, and gives the players a living and vibrant setting to do their thing in.
I'm looking forward to watching your other videos, and here's another vote for "Yes, Procedural Combat video, please!". Sorry for the verbosity, and thanks for the thought that's been provoked!
Welcome! Savage World is one of those systems I keep meaning to try but have yet to. This makes me want to even more, thanks!
@@BanditsKeep It's my go to for anything that isn't "Hit Points and Classes" fantasy, cos sometimes that's what you want! If you pick it up, I hope you can mine some useful stuff out of it!
Thank you! Your videos have been very useful to me, as I am designing a game based on the Rules Cyclopedia. Your output is clear and understandable, and gives ideas. Keep up the Good Work 👌👍👏👏👏🤚
Thank You!
That clarifying summary before closing out the round I find absolutely necessary to keep order but it breaks immersion for some people and I get that but I need it to be sure everyone’s where they planned to be
For sure
Food for thought here, another good one, Master Daniel!
Thanks
Great video dude. Agree that you don’t need a bunch of crazy stuff to spice up combats and to end it short when the monsters are outnumbered.
I run 5e, albeit a home brewed version that’s trying to be more old school. I’d love to hear how you run procedural/side initiative as it sounds right up my alley.
Cool, thanks
I'm attacking 🤔
But seriously, I only run seriously strategic combat when a "certain player" isn't there because I know he hates it haha, which is fine, good old hack and slash session
Boring is subjective to each player
You make excellent points as always Daniel :)
For sure - all points must be taken “with a grain of salt” as they say
Good stuff! Set piece combats are fun... but not when every combat is a set piece.
Indeed
I frankly love procedural combat. I am especially enamored of the system from ASSH. I do use a couple of combat hacks though to make certain choices mean more. Specifically weapon choices. Reach weapons interrupt movement towards a character. Not a free attack, it just bumps them up in the initiative order. Readied range weapons, like a loaded crossbow or a bow go first in a round. Hurled weapons and slings go on the standard position. Short weapons like daggers and saps are interrupted by normal sized weapons like a mace. I use 10 second rounds so movement or action are the options. As I run mostly 1 on 1 games I don't wipe out spells for an interrupted spell, but it does give incentive to keep a staff or wand around as they are like pulling a trigger and work in early parts of the procedure. I dont' have all of it in front of me, but you can get the idea I am sure.
I also don't want, as the DM of a single character and a couple henchmen, want to roll for every single kobold, so I group them up into mobs.
A drag arse combat is a downer, so I will have enemies disengage toss down their caltrops or treasure and flee when it is appropriate. Not everything has to be a moral check, as I believe you mentioned.
Yes ASSH has a neat system - by interior do you mean “go before” or actually stop an attack?
Ok, I usually have no problem with combat, but that summary thing .. I have heared that the second time now. I will give this a try next session. I think this could make a positive difference. Thank you, Daniel! :)
Also I want to add: Patreon is fine but me personally am not interested in mailing lists, social media, discord and so on.
Let me know how it works out for you.
Daniel, you should consider either publishing a guide (book or pdf). I’ve listened to many ttrpg TH-camrs and you are one if the best. Cheers!
Thank You!
IN our Pathfinder campaign, we used to roll initiative every turn, but that caused spells to be worthless(hold person at end of round, but target making their save at the beginning of the next round), we ended up rerolling initiative every 5 rounds!
That’s a good alternative
I find that shifting all rolls onto the player side of the table really helps people stay engaged. When you tell someone "Roll to dodge the Orc's attack" it makes them feel more in control and invested than just rolling the die yourself, and telling them damage.
I run a system that is kinda hacked together using the stat-pools from Monte Cook's Cipher system, so it's even more engaging when that player can make decisions about what resources to spend (or not spend) to dodge that attack.
Cool
Great stuff as always, Daniel.
Thank You!
I like the idea of overland narrative combat. This is an interesting idea.
Thanks
This seems very similar to segments. I had a thought to roll initiative when it mattered with the participants for each melee separate.
The ranger shooting his bow doesn’t roll initiative for the melee he’s not in.
I kinda don’t like that people don’t just move at the same time in some systems. Enemies win initiative and can close distance and hit you before you get a chance to react.
Players should have the ability to engage or avoid and it helps add another level of decision.
Just a trap where you run enemies into an ambush is difficult in modern games.
Simultaneous movement would be tricky to adjudicate- I guess you could do 1/2 then 1/2 so both sides have some options.
wow. Thanks for this Daniel. I guess since I've been running the same 2E campaign now for 30 years you'd probably say I'm 'OSR' and so, a lot of what you describe here just seems second nature to me but, the way you explain it and organize it is fantastic. I've analyzed 5E to the end and back and can easily see how combat could get boring.
Thanks
I could say that your procedural combat would be great in a pbta context, and definitely i wanna hear more but I'll implement it for sure
Cool
09:01 - Checking out the Post-Melee Morale tabulation on p. 15 of my copy of Chainmail, averaging the 4 PCs and 2 remaining Orcs out as Heavy Foot and averaging the d6 for winning combat to 3.5 - that results in a Morale difference of 12 - doubling to 24 because the combat involved fewer than 20 figures. On a 24? The losing side retreats!
So I don't *want* to say, "Everyone should read Chainmail," but...
;-)
Indeed!
Some ideas I've toyed with involve things cribbed from video games, like:
All-Out Attack (Persona series) - If every enemy is incapacitated, the party can skip rolling for initiative and roll for damage all at once. The rolls are added up, averaged out by the number of enemies, and dealt as Force damage to all enemies.
Chain Attack Multiplier (Xenoblade Chronicles) - A d6 is placed on the table, with 1 facing up. Each time a PC lands a hit, the d6 is switched up one number, and the next successful attack by a PC has its damage multiplied by that number, up to 6, whereas a miss "resets" the d6.
Those are fun ideas!
I have run a BX game for nearly 3 years now and I have also found the morale works against the flow of the game and the rotation of misses can be an issue
Works against? Not sure I follow you
Love your coat sequence, even though I prefer spell before missiles, cause i like magic being an extention of will, therefore faster than any other action that requires lifting a sword or aimin at a target, for example. My reference scene is when gandalf the white block aragaron legolas and gimly in one shot because he's boss ahahaha
Yes he is! I think procedurally it’s not first so you have a chance to interrupt spells.
Please do a video on procedural combat!! ❤
I plan to
I think the key is describing ie role playing. If the DM can describe the PCs slashing and the goblins blocking and parrying that is so much better than “I attack, 13.” “You miss. Next” . If you can set the example then the players will hopefully start describing too, all it takes for it to be fun is using any other verb than “attack”.
Will try your procedural combat to see how that plays out. Seems mostly moving the descriptions to the end of the round. Not sure I have that much RAM in board.
Oh for sure - individual attacks can and should still be described as they happen as well to keep everything exciting
How to make combat interesting and NOT a boring chore:
1) Narrate Narrate Narrate!!
2) be loose on the rules.
3) don't make every enemy a boss-like Warrior.
Narration :
Combat MUST be cinematic.
I mean we all love action combat scenes and that's what makes us be in a great fighting game.
If your fighting scene is like "roll your dice. OK you hit for x-dice damage or you miss, take x-dice wounds" or something the players feels like they are doing math.
But if you say "tell me what you want to do and roll dice." Then depending on success or failure narrate what happened.
"You swing your battle axe while running towards the orc warrior. He tries to give you a powerful hit with his hammer but with a swift move you avoid the blow. Dirt and stones are shattered around while the hammer hits the ground. And with a fast slash you cut the Orc's body from shoulder to belly. Thick blood and guts are spread all over while the Orc falls to the ground biting the dust for the last time."
Loose rules:
Don't make every fight a war simulation. Sometimes strict rules can be tiresome and bothering.
Who cares if you're 10 meters away or 15? Make a combat zone of 3 areas. Far, Close, Face to face.
In a far distance spell and missile users can act first maybe twice. In close they can act once. And in face to face fighting is melee and simultaneous.
Don't count seconds and turns by the "clock" but by your logic and loosely.
Hard or easy fights:
Depending on the enemy make fights ending in a few turns. You fight inferior enemies. Kill in one hit. Don't count hit points.
You fight superior enemies. Give the fight about 3-5 turns. Or less. If the enemy is too hard the player should act accordingly and not try to beat the odds by a lucky dice roll.
But give the players a chance of a way out to a difficult situation even at their "last moment before death".
But don't be loose on the consequences.
As a martial pugilist, procedural combat feels real. I know how long it takes my foe to take certain actions.
I see when I can act first, interrupt or when he’s got me on speed so I need power and accuracy.
Even “the ol one two” is a procedural action in combat
Interesting take! I like that
Group initiative, for monsters, individual players, press every round - weapon speed should matter, greatly enhances the wizards and Rogues
Indeed
Great video! Btw what is this thumbnail art from? Very cool
Thanks 🙏🏻 - art is from wizards
Yeah, so we need the combat video please!
Will do!
wow, so practical! great vid
Thank You!
Combat for the Tunnels & Trolls system is really abstract and only becomes granular if the players want to do something creative. Very simply, the players all roll their dice for damage and the GM rolls for the monster's damage. Each subtracts their result from the other's hit points. At this point, each side rolls fewer and fewer dice (depending on how much HP they have remaining) until one is eliminated or flees. I ran a T&T game with a bunch of AD&D veterans and they were gobsmacked by how fast and simple it was. They had options if they wanted to use them but they were also glad to be able to run 5 fights AND explore the dungeon to its end in a single session.
Sounds cool
I still use individual initiative because an app I use makes it very easy to set up quickly. If I ever had to stop using that app I'm abandoning it for group initiative lol
Cool
Thanks a lot Daniel for the great video!
I have to admit, as a rpg newbie who has only played D&D 5e, I'm having trouble understanding exactly how procedural combat plays out. Is it the GM who at each round determines who goes when, depending on the actions people declare? That's how I understood it from the video at least. An example would be amazing.
yes, the order of combat is based on the actions, if two people are doing the same thing, typically the players decide the order of their actions. Two PCs attacking an ogre - one wants to tackle them, the other stab them with a spear - they would have the “tackler” go first so the spearman gets advantage (assuming the ogre goes down).
Iv found that if i make my combat encounters important to the narritive or theres an objective to it, like saving or protecting the hostages or retreating from an ambush that you have no way of winning gets my players more invested and talking with echother to plan moves and strategies. Just last weekend i had all 8 of them exploring a mad scientist lair and they stumbled into his trap of 40 mutated humans that were no stronger then normal towns folk but because the lab was already set to flood once the support pillars fell in a few minutes it made the whole experience adrenaline pumping for everyone. Me included
Nice!
Spontaneous Owlbears will spice things up.
For sure!
Hey, Daniel! Great video, excellent points on length of combat, etc. I feel like this is starting to get closer to your podcast topic of your ongoing hack of Chainmail. You tend to make reference to many things in how your table runs. Is there one of your Actual Play posts that you feel is a good example of this stuff? I'd maybe go so fast as to recommend posting one of them to your podcast feed as well..
Thanks! Hmm I don’t know any one session that embodies the “best” of my combat ideals, but probably something more recent would be the closest
@@BanditsKeep I've found a few of your older Od&d hack APs and I have listened to several of your APs through the adventures you designed "on screen". Just wondered if there was one you'd recommend to me and your other acolytes.
Excellent advice. Players make combat boring by making enemies bags of hit points. They should be roleplaying in combat (not roll-playing) and attempting maneuvers. Players need to pay attention when it's not their turn, and be ready when it is their turn. As DM, I use theater of the mind for easier combats. I also narrate some combats, especially the end of an easy win. Temper this with knowing your table. Some people really like to finish off the combatants. I use scatter terrain to keep it simple. The battle board is only for important combats. Side initiative is very deadly if all the enemies get to go first and it's a challenging combat. We use individual initiative and it works well when everyone is paying attention. Players have to be familiar with their abilities and how they work, and I try to be as well. Nose out of books, no arguing (unless I contradict the rules), move the spotlight if it linger son a player for too long.
Sound like you have fun combats!
Oh and the resource question for 5e is a fair one. I particularly make goodberry consume its material component, then have them search for said material component if they want it. I think its a sprig of mistletoe.... But if you tell your players that it works this way, and that resource consumption is important; they will act accordingly. The specific ruling I've used is that to have a long rest they must eat and drink something, while to have a short rest they must either eat or drink something. I don't make that something specific, or a specific amount, and I only implement these things if after I bring it up the players at my table think its cool. Sometimes they do, other times they don't. When they do, just scavenging for food has been fun for my players especially when they go out of the way to describe how they cook it or how their character eats it.
I have a long rest be a night's sleep and a short rest is an hour where you must eat.
@@swaghauler8334 Good on ya! I didn't include the sleep part, but that is also mandatory on Long Rests yeah.
Cool
Another great gaming philosophy video! Nice!
Thank You!
A thing I’ve been playing with is reverse procedural combat. So, lowest initiative describes their move fist, highest goes last. This rewards players that roll high with more information.
Another thing, which has been getting mixed responses, is to allow players to change their action in response to what happens during a particular resolution, but it has to be made immediately after that resolution.
The first thing you describe I have seen in a few skirmish war games
@@BanditsKeep Nothing new under the sun, I reckon.
@@patrickrobles1036 for sure! I need to give that a shot in an rpg
My take: One approach doesnt fit all situations. Individual initiative is likely better for set piece battles. Procedural is better for resource drain battles. Free narration is better for "flavor combat". Unfortunately I have yet to see a system actually embracing such a tiering by providing a system suitable for all 3. For instance 5ed bonus action and reaction systems are designed for individual initiative in a way that can make it awkward to run a purist procedural combat with certain characters that is buildt around these systems.
I agree! Check out my podcast (shameless plug) Chainmail does all that - which is the reason my “heartbreaker” is based on that system and not the d20
I hope you can make the video on procedural combat. I listened to your description twice and I don't see how it will be faster than using initiative. Even if they decide melee or spell ahead of time, they would still have to target, roll dice, and resolve.
I’m trying to figure out a way to film it where you would actually see how fast it is, me explaining it is not going to be fast with her I was explaining this or standard initiative
Combat encounters as they should be! Daniel a toast to another great video!!! You reminded me what it is that I have been missing.
Time to tell them to not look at their character sheet and just tell me what they are doing.
Thanks! For sure
Please do a video about combat procedure
Will do
On Tuesday night my players spent 3 hours fighting a dracoiich head to head. By the end of it they were almost dead, the shield guardian was crushed, their hoverskiff was wrecked, the tank's power armor (ala barrier peaks) was trashed and they killed it...not really killed, but defeated. The battle felt good. Everyone walked away feeling like they did something. I gave them level 12. Good times.
Nice!
Have you done a video all about "procedural combat" ? Especially for how you did it for your 5E gaming. I liked what you had to say - but not enough time spent on how you adjudicate this. Would love to hear more - since I too think individual initiative takes too long.
Working on one now!
Would love to see an in game example of procedural combat.
Excellent
@@BanditsKeep great video by the way. Brand new subscriber here!
DM, " Party of orcs and PC surprise each other at a tunnel cross junction, roll for initiative actions."
My rogue gains highest initiative so I kneel and throw out dice and gambling trade goods.
Remember most patrol guards are bored and pass the time by playing dice.
DM, " Roll body language charisma check to see if any of the patrol guards follow you lead."
Chaotics are less likely to have strict patrols and shirk their duties to play dice.
Orcs and drow may very well shoot dice, hobgoblins may do belly to the ground to arm wrestle as strength challenge as a precursor to diplomacy checks. It is easier to talk/trade your way into a camp to scout the numbers then hack & slash murder hobo your way, depending on the DM.
You could just kill off a drow outpost patrol or trade your way into drow political intrigue for better magic items and a greater story.
For sure
Never heard of procedural combat before. sounds helpful for cutting down wasted time from regular initiative. I'm not sure if it's something my players would like, I might see if I can use it in tandem with a grid map and make a sort of hybrid method.
Sure, using elements of different systems that work for your table is often the best solution
I generally like and agree with all your points in this video, however I play almost exclusively in systems like 5e, Starfinder, and Pathfinder 2e, and in those systems the older style of,
"Declare spells>Movement>Missile>Spells are cast>Melee" or similar,
would require a complete 80% to 100% overhaul of all the combat rules. Save that section of the video being for lack of a better work, useless, I quite like this. I may watch more of your content over the next few days.
Thanks- I used this same concept when I ran 5e - not the exact procedure but the “what are you doing” and then the action and it worked fine for my table for a long campaign up to 13th level. It does take a few sessions to “kick in”
Of course
Please, talk about procedure combat.
Great video btw...
Will do, thanks!
Both sides rolling d6 (or d10 if you're a 2E person) each round for initiative is great. 100% agree. I've found that having side initiative is enough to speed up the combat, though. Last year, I tried doing declarations at the start of each round, and phased rounds (move/missile/magic/melee) like the books say, but even simple declarations slowed things down a bit. These days, I just have the sides roll, and then go around the table when the players' side is up. Keeps things rolling, and usually my 8 year old son is the only one who slows things down, as he's thinking of something creative or funny to do rather than just attack.
Declaring does take some practice to be smooth for sure
@@BanditsKeep I do like your idea of having the players just state the general action/phase they intend. My players were trying to tell me everything during declaration, then having to tell me again when it was actually their turn.
Yes! Side based initiative every round makes D&D combat sooooooo much better and faster. You also cut out everybody hemming and hawing when it gets to their turn. Every turn. That is soooo sloooow.
I do prefer side based for sure
something I've started doing with combats that are meaningless are weaving some sort of narrative into it that could make it not even a combat. a simple recent example was the party running into a bear as a random encounter that would've been a push over. so instead I had them run into a hunter (who was from the town they're going to) pursuing a bear which turned into an argument and a social encounter and the bear smacking someone and running off which was much more interesting than melting down a bear in half a turn
Nice!
Is procedural combat similar to side the side inititiative they talk about in the 5e DMG? I've always wanted to try it. Seems like it would be very engaging but I think it might take slightly longer. However because it forces people to all think as a group I think it might be faster because they know as soon as the monster's go they'll have to get another round of activity ready to input. Thank you for sharing your insights.
Yes, I believe it is similar- I found (when I used it in 5e) at first combat slowed down as the group got used to it, but in the end it was faster than individual at my table.
Maybe I'm missing something but procedural combat sounds like it's more of a headache to try and keep everyone's actions straight rather than standard initiative. Also I found it funny that in almost every example of making combat faster involves spellcasters skipping their turn or not having a turn before all the enemies are defeated. :) Otherwise solid advice (outside of procedural combat - I don't see the point or how it's going to speed things up).
It speeds things up because the players must make a (general) choice before they see what everyone else does. Spellcasters should not always cat spells IMO and they should not feel bad that they “can’t do anything” was my point. Of course if you are playing in a game with cantrips that is not the case.
@@BanditsKeep How do you keep track of player choices at the start of each round and how do you stop players from planning out their entire turn in advance since they are declaring actions simultaneously? Also, if two players want to both swing in melee for example, how do you determine which of them gets to roll and resolve first? Genuinely curious, just trying to understand the advantage of procedural combat and how it plays out at the table.
I use the opposite of your "narrate it" technique. I tell the players that they come across some orcs and then tell them how the orcs successfully slaughter and disembowel them.
I see, well, whatever works for your table
I haven't tried this method before but it sounds interesting. One thing I have heard and tried, which seemed to work for my group, was using a timer. a 10 second timer to replicate their in-game combat time. I think it helps people think for their upcoming turn because they cant ponder their actions or discuss their coordinated moves during the 10s, they have to know beforehand. Of course, if the rolling itself goes over 10s that's not a problem, just making the decision and talking to other PC's. Curious if you've tried this and your thoughts on it?
I’ve heard of people using that, For me It has never been needed - but if it helps I can’t see it hurting
I personally just implimented a timer for the first time: 2 minutes to each side (we've got minions/hirelings that draws out combat more) and it worked really well for us. I use FoundryVTT, so it had a visual timer with a ticking sound for the "critical" last 30 seconds. For the first time, I didn't punish anyone for going over time, but did offer a bonus to looting if they never went over. Even though me, the DM, and our necromancer didn't always stick within the 2 minutes, it really helped push us to move much faster.
It made combat feel more frantic, more urgent, more intense. Both I and my players made "mistakes", or at least tactically sub-par moves for the sake of moving faster, which feels realistic and dramatic. It also showed us there was a lot of room to improve our personal skill as well! I highly recommend it. Figit with timing/consequences so it fits your group, but I don't think I'll ever go back to un-timed combat now!
On quick for D&D Type Games - Take the Stunt Die from Flying Swordsmen and add it to your game
Add more to make it faster? 😉
@@BanditsKeep The Stunt Die adds more action without sacraficing speed
@@BanditsKeep The fastest game I have played is Better Games Fantasy OSR with their Fantasy Hex Crawl.
excellent thank you
Thanks for watching
Funny I see wondering monsters as an equal part “resource on the horse”
Sure, I’m some systems - in others they make no lasting impact (during overland travel)
I would like to see this played out in 5e.
Give to a shot
I would also add that you should make sure to dress the room a bit. You don't need anything super elaborate for every combat, but even just putting in some furniture or whatever else can go a long way, especially for fighters. I've found there's nothing more boring than combat in an otherwise empty room, playing a character who's only real options are to make normal weapon attacks every round, especially in systems where spell casters are able to cast spells basically every round. Being able to incorporate things in the room into attacks really helps to create those exciting cinematic moments that make the fight interesting. Throw people through tables! Hit people with chairs! Push people down the stairs! Set barrels on fire! Shove people into fire pits! Swing from chandeliers! You get the idea. (Also, as a DM I would make doing things like that be at least as useful as just making a weapon attack, regardless of the rules. A lot of systems, such as 5e, make it so it's almost never worthwhile to make more interesting attacks, since they typically do little to no damage and most effects, such as prone, rarely hinder enemies in any meaningful way.)
For sure - I like to give a basic idea of the space and be open to player’s ideas of what might be there as well.
Do you use any modifiers for side v side initiative? It seems like it's just roll d6 without any Dex modifier.
Nope
Me just wanting to know what that background picture is from !
Wizards
A fight is exciting until it's clearly decided who will win, not until all enemy are dead.
Movies teach us wrong things. Many underlings in reality won't be loyal to a shitty boss until death like in John Wick. Russian soldiers are currently deserting or running for their lives or fight forced by their own officers. So when 30 street ruffians surround 4 awesome heroes, who take out 10 with ease, the rest will run. And why die for Lord Evil, who is in the habit of killing underlings for mistakes? Some heroes entering the scene is the right moment for desertion and leave the heroes to have their boss fight. Even monsters might be mothers with a kid somewhere. If the heroes clearly aren't snack, then run. Large scale medieval battles show the same pattern: one fights the battle as long as there is believe one can win. If that is lost, run to fight another day.
For sure
I learned combat phases from Rolemaster. Is procedural the same thing?
I’m going to say yes - haven’t players rolemaster but that is my understanding