|
3 years ago ::
Jan 20, 2010 - 6:04PM
#1
|
|
|
I was wondering how people classify a combat as a "grind." Many people have said that they dislike combat X or Y in a mod because it's a "grind," but I'm not sure we all define that in the same way.
I have even seen DMs call a fight half-way through the second round of combat because they thought the fight had turned into a "boring grind" despite the fact the some players had only taken one turn (during which they may or may not have been dazed/dominated/stunned). That seemed kinda crazy to me - but is this a common opinion? How many rounds is too many? Or does the "grindy-ness" of a fight depend more on other factors like how many controlling effects the monsters have or whether there's other things to do in the fight besides attack the monsters (like an incorporated skill challenge)?
Lori Anderson
WotC Freelancer, LFR author
@LittleLorika
CALI3-3 The Agony of Almraiven (co-author)
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author)
CALI4-1 Plain of Stone Spiders (author)
QUES4-1 Liberation (co-author)
EPIC5-1 Plaguewrought Prism (co-author)
TotalCon: http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 20, 2010 - 6:37PM
#2
|
|
|
It seems like people decide a fight is a grind or not based on the style of character they built. Many characters are built to blow their wad in the first round with lots of minor attack powers, immediate attack powers, items that give them extra actions, action points, etc. Players of this kind of character are often bored out of their mind after a few rounds of combat. (Of course they are -after their super-nova first turn, all they're doing is lack-luster at-will after at-will.) Other builds/powers require a while to build up or enable a character to have a long, interesting, engaging battle without the player getting bored. Perhaps this is why people don't always agree on whether a fight was a grind or not, even if they were playing at the same table.
I have observed that the two play/character-styles do not always mesh well together. Either the combat takes a long time and the player who used all their interesting powers in round 1 is bored to tears or the combat is over in a flash and the other kind of player is disappointed that they didn't have time to set up their cool combo. (Or maybe the fight really is a total grind and everyone is utterly bored.)
I've noticed that my "slow" characters (for lack of a better word - the characters that don't use every single encounter power in the first round or two) rarely get to use all of their powers because either the strikers nova all the monsters in the first few rounds or because the DM has decided the fight is a grind. This is especially true at paragon tier when characters have a lot more powers/options and the difference in the number of rounds it takes for various style characters to use all their encounter powers can be large.
One of my characters has a daily power that lets her recover an encounter power after she's used all her encounter powers. I almost never get to use it because it's hard to use every encounter power in a fight. (And on the rare occasion that I could use it, the fight is usually almost-won and using a daily power seems like a waste.) I know there are similar powers in other classes. A power like that requires a character to use every encounter attack power, another round to use the daily power, and yet another round to actually use the recovered encounter power a second time. It can be hard to pull off. So, are powers like that just a total waste and people shouldn't take them because the fight's almost always going to be over before they can use it? (I have managed to use this particular daily power successfully a few times, but many other times I have been disappointed due to fights being over too fast or a "grindy" fight being called.)
Similar arguments could be made about other combos that take a while to set up.
Lori Anderson
WotC Freelancer, LFR author
@LittleLorika
CALI3-3 The Agony of Almraiven (co-author)
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author)
CALI4-1 Plain of Stone Spiders (author)
QUES4-1 Liberation (co-author)
EPIC5-1 Plaguewrought Prism (co-author)
TotalCon: http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 20, 2010 - 6:45PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Dec 16, 2005
|
I think that most people categorize combats as a grind when:
a1. The outcome is not in doubt
a2. Everyone's cool powers have already been used or are unavailable (perhaps because the monsters are immune/resistant or perhaps because they are out of range).
a3. Therefore, the players are just spamming the same at-wills and the monsters are spamming the same attacks (unless they recharge).
Grinds get worse when:
b1. It is obvious that it will take many, many more rounds to resolve. (For example, the players are all reduced to ranged basic attacks against a monster that still has 100 hp and is insubstatial or the monster has 4 hits worth of hit points left but the PCs only hit on a 17+).
Sometimes people will call a combat a grind when a1 is not true, but b1 is true--the outcome is in doubt, but it is obvious that it will take many many rounds to complete (for example, the players are slowly whittling down the hit points of the monster, but they are largely out of healing and a few lucky hits by the monsters could overwhelm the consecrated ground healing and actually kill a PC or the monster has six hundred plus hit points, regeneration, and could theoretically overwhelm all of the PCs healing if he rolled a little bit hot, but, with the PCs dealing 40-50 damage per round, it will take 15-20 rounds to resolve that). Another way that a combat could have the outcome in doubt but still be a grind is if a somewhat unlikely series of events could prove a TPK. I have often seen combats called when the party clearly had the upper hand, but there is still a 1/9 chance that the monster will recharge its recharge 5-6 close burst power every round for the next three rounds and with a couple good damage rolls, could TPK the party.
I have seen my share of DMs calling fights early--even occasionally when in my estimation the monsters were winning--because "the monsters had no chance" but I think that stems from DMs misreading the tactical situation. Sometimes, it also stems from the DM just not being interested in watching the beat-down occur--something which is really different from my idea of a grind.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 20, 2010 - 7:34PM
#4
|
- Senior Volunteer Community Lead
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
I did a fight against a green dragon once that I thought was a grind after round 2... I'd not be surprised if there are fights I'd consider a grind in round 1, with the right group and combat setup.
Effectively, it's when it feels as if I don't have interesting decisions to make and there's little or no excitement to be had. For example, a hovering flier is doing a small amount of damage at a range that no PC can operate effectively at, so a few people are making crappy javelin attacks, but said flier has no real ability to kill anyone. At that point, I'd just as soon have the option of having a computer automate the combat and move on.
But yeah, EB's got it pretty much right.
I will say that whether a combat feels like a grind can be a separate beast from whether a combat should be called. We're on a clock with LFR, so combats should be resolved within a certain amount of time if they can be. Some people don't deal very well with that.
Keith Richmond
Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 20, 2010 - 7:59PM
#5
|
|
|
Two scenarios for consideration:
1) As Keithric points out, the PCs are engaged in a battle with a flier or two, they don't have good ranged attacks and the NPCs don't have much of a chance of killing the PCs. If the DM pauses to consider the motivations of the enemy, she might conclude that these creatures realize they won't be able to do anything to the PCs, so they fly away.
2) As Elder_basilisk says, some combats may be clearly in the PCs' favor, but the enemy might pull out a win. Only if they recharge that one power, and it hits just right against the leader, or something like that. But if the DM considers the NPC's point of view, they might give up and let the PCs win, or they might flee, or possibly a third option.
I've seen combat in 4e turn into grind sessions, and in almost every case I've "called it" by having the monsters act in accordance with their nature and their situation. My opinion, then, is that when a combat is reduced to constant grinding one side or the other should be considering their options.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 20, 2010 - 8:57PM
#6
|
- Dragon Slayer
- If only he would apply himself
- Dammit Jim, this is Star Trek, not D&D!
Date Joined:
Jan 31, 2006
|
The key, to me, is that the combat is not in doubt. With no excitement, you just don't have much of a reason to play it out.
I don't experience a grind very often, but that may be because I often play with four players and two are strong strikers with good flexibility. With fewer foes and the PCs going more often, the feel of a grind is reduced.
Follow my blog and Twitter feed with Dark Sun campaign design and DM tips! Dark Sun's Ashes of Athas Campaign is now available for home play (PM me with your e-mail to order the campaign adventures).
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 20, 2010 - 11:40PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Dec 16, 2005
|
Two scenarios for consideration:
1) As Keithric points out, the PCs are engaged in a battle with a flier or two, they don't have good ranged attacks and the NPCs don't have much of a chance of killing the PCs. If the DM pauses to consider the motivations of the enemy, she might conclude that these creatures realize they won't be able to do anything to the PCs, so they fly away.
Another relevant scenario is where the monsters do have a chance of killing the PCs... eventually. Maybe it's a good chance. Maybe it's a not a good chance. But either way, I think it's still a grind. The trouble is you can't really call it to avoid the grind because somewhere about round 20, the PCs will be out of healing and one monster will probably be dead with the other at 50% hit points. Then, another five rounds and the monster might be dead... or it might have killed a PC and be at 25% hit points.
I've seen combat in 4e turn into grind sessions, and in almost every case I've "called it" by having the monsters act in accordance with their nature and their situation. My opinion, then, is that when a combat is reduced to constant grinding one side or the other should be considering their options
IMO, the biggest trouble is when the PCs don't have any options (the NPCs are faster/the door closed behind the PCs/etc) but the NPCs are on a course to eventually win the grind. Grind scenarios inherently favor monsters because PCs run out of healing powers fairly quickly while monsters never had any to begin with and likewise PCs run out of encounter powers (and even dailies) fairly quickly but monsters can keep recharging all day. I think that not understanding this dynamic is why some DMs call fights early. A rogue wins init and charges then action points for torturous strike, follows up with press the advantage for the kill and on the next round has a flank from the fighter and attacks with circling predator followed by low slash and sneak in the attack. Great. But the rogue is fresh out of encounter powers at that point so her damage output is going to flatline. (If the rogue is 9th level, she may still have a couple dailies she could use if she were putting everything into one fight, but she's pretty much tapped out). I suspect that the DMs who call the encounter at that point somehow expect the PCs' damage output to stay at the same level for the whole fight. To address Keith's point, I suspect that smaller tables tend to reduce grind a lot--especially 4 player tables with two strikers. When there are fewer hit points on both sides to work through and the party has characters who specialize in working through hit points, things will tend to finish quickly.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 21, 2010 - 12:25AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
I was wondering how people classify a combat as a "grind."
I hadn't thought about it. Obviously, it's mainly that it's taking too long. I suppose even a long combat could avoid being a grind if it was varied enough. The key is that it gets boring and frustrating. That could be on the DM for coming up with a bad encounter, or on the players for aproaching it unimaginatively.
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 21, 2010 - 1:02AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Dec 23, 2009
|
If the combat is not in doubt, why the heck are the monsters not trying to escape (possibly with their loot/secrets/etc.)? Are they waiting for reinforcements or are they just stupid?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 21, 2010 - 4:23AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 24, 2007
|
I think that most people categorize combats as a grind when:
a1. The outcome is not in doubt
a2. Everyone's cool powers have already been used or are unavailable (perhaps because the monsters are immune/resistant or perhaps because they are out of range).
a3. Therefore, the players are just spamming the same at-wills and the monsters are spamming the same attacks (unless they recharge).
Yes. The keywords are "lengthy" and "repetitive".
Causes are either that the monster is unusually hard to hit (because of high defenses, terrain, powers that negate hits, or powers that impose attack penalties), or that the monster takes an unusual amount of hits to go down (because of high hit points, healing powers, regeneration, insubstanialness or powers that weaken). Pretty much every solo monster constitutes a grind.
|
|
|
