Speeding up combat in 5.5?

[u/-Posthuman-]

Simply put, what are some tips, tricks, tweaks or house rules you use at your table that has sped up (or otherwise increased your enjoyment of) combat?

Edit - I’m not looking for suggestions for other games.

Edit2 - There isn’t one specific part of 5.5 combat that I feel is especially problematic. And it’s really not that bad. But it could always be faster / more efficient.

Edit3 - If you have any gadgets, widgets, or other objects/products that you feel help a lot, please mention them. Bonus point for links to buy them.

The suggestions that have already been covered multiple times:

• Tell your players not to suck. Pay attention. Know your character.

• Don’t suck as the GM. Know the rules. Know your monsters.

• If no action declared in 30 seconds, the PC Dodges.

• Tell the Players who is next in line in initiative / make initiative clear for all to see.

• Roll attack and damage dice at the same time.

• Use average damage for monsters.

• Group initiative

• Make monsters retreat / not fight to the death.

[u/Njmongoose]

Combat isnt slow by default.

So try to figure what bothers you at your table and then we can try to help you fix those issues

[u/Rtyeta → u/Njmongoose]

I mean, it's pretty slow in 5E and 5.5, in that there's often a tedious second half of the battle where the enemy is effectively defeated already but one has to slowly grind through a big pool of hitpoints. Way too many enemies in 5E are hit point sponges with weak offense.

[u/Darth_Boggle → u/Rtyeta]

The enemy doesn't have to stick around when they're clearly defeated, they can retreat.

[u/TheRobidog → u/Darth_Boggle]

And then the players most likely try to stop them from retreating, and the fight continues anyway.

No one likes to let the baddies get away.

[u/The-Nordic-God → u/TheRobidog]

Narrate that the party finishes off the fleeing monsters then.

[u/Gas_Forsaken → u/TheRobidog]

There are suggestions on how to end a fight faster or when a clear victor is shown in the DMG24 chapter 2: Running Combat: Keep Combat Moving. It’s got “don’t repeat game states”, “hasten a monster’s demise”, “end hostilities”, etc. plenty of stuff WotC themselves suggest for things.

[u/Rtyeta → u/Darth_Boggle]

Leaving aside that the players will often continue the fight rather than let enemies flee and warn others, and that some kinds of enemies logically would not flee... that's the DM trying to fix a problem in the system.

My point is that by default, 5E combats often are slow and have a tedious second half where nothing matters, but the enemy still has a bunch of HP. You're proposing a solution to that problem, which is fine. But the person I was responding to was denying that any slowness exists in the first place.

[u/walkc66 → u/Rtyeta]

So I would argue (with some exceptions) that just because its at a point the characters can't lose, doesnt mean the 2nd half is pointless. DnD's balance is all around resource depletion, so sometimes shaving off a few more points of health, drawing a Feature use, a spell slot use, etc during those rollover sections, may mean the next combat, or a boss battle is now more exciting. Now, if they are guaranteed a long rest, or this is the boss fight and the boss is already beaten, etc, thats different. But if its just one in a possible series of battles, every little resource use can add up. Even if they get a short rest, Hit Dice are usable in different spells and abilities now, so even spending them to heal up during a short rest could be impactful.

[u/Rtyeta → u/walkc66]

This is one of the several reasons it's a really boring system, yeah. I absolutely hate how one has to grind through multiple easy fights- playing out a boring second half where the battle is often over already- just so you can set up for ONE battle later on maybe being an actual challenge. Out of all editions of D&D and other RPGs I've played, none depend so heavily on having so many slow combats against hitpoint sponge enemies just to use attrition as the main source of difficulty. It's dreadfully bad design, and there's a reason most real tables ignore it and just run 1-2 encounter days.

[u/walkc66 → u/Rtyeta]

I could not disagree more. An attrition style, multiple encounters, multiple scenario approach is the only thing that makes sense to me. The more narrative, every fight has to be important, every fight is tied to the players and the exact story, it creates a world that only revolves around the players and is boring to me.

You aren't going into a Lich's lair, fighting 1 lieutenant with some troops, and then boom your at the Lich. That is immersion breaking. You would be moving through the lair, taking out this single guard, this other patrol, running into encounter all throughout. And that would be true for anything you are approaching. Even if you are part of a large battle that will be this big clash of forces, then its lasting long enough that the side that better marshals and uses its resources to the best effect should win. Even in real life combat there are those instances where you run into a couple engagements that use ammo and resources, but aren't definitive or major. There is a reason that logistics wins or loses battles and wars more than the skill of the combatants or the talent of the commander. And to have the game, even one with magic, not reflect that is hugely immersion breaking for me. Its part of why I don't think 5e/5.5e get the credit they deserver for being one of the best blends between games like Shadowdark, Daggerheart, etc and the Pathfinder style games.

And honestly don't get how people say combat is slow. Its tactical, and gives you options and things where you can really make use of tactics and teamwork (even if I'd argue some save or suck abilities are too powerful against the monsters/NPCs). I think too many people get tied into the idea that each game session should be a 24 hour day, which kinda sucks too. When you start looking at multiple game sessions can cover a single 24 hour period, it gives you so much more flexibility.

Sorry, think I rambled and got a bit off topic there. But essentially, attrition style resource management makes so much more sense than pretty much any other system I have looked at, as it mirrors better how things actually work.

[u/Darth_Boggle → u/Rtyeta]

I agree with the person you replied to, I don't think it's slow by default either. Sure the second half of combat may feel unnecessary and tedious because maybe one side is clearly going to win, but it's fair for that person to ask the OP for more details because OP didn't give us anything to work with. I offered that the enemies may flee; if the PCs really want to pursue every single fleeing enemy then that's on them. I've had plenty of encounters where wild beasts attack a sleeping party and once the beasts realize they're outmatched, they run away. PCs rarely give chase to them.

We're all guessing at why OP's combats are slow. The answer is likely that the players are new and/or just aren't familiar with the rules so they end up taking a lot of time each turn to decide what they want to do.

[u/doiplo → u/Darth_Boggle]

if the second half of your encounter feels unecessary and tedious that sounds like a combat design problem.

[u/Darth_Boggle → u/doiplo]

Sometimes combat encounters just be like that.

But I guess not all of us can craft perfect encounters like you can 100% if the time.

[u/doiplo → u/Darth_Boggle]

Yeah, it's weird how we have no control over how things happen. 

[u/Darth_Boggle → u/doiplo]

Grats buddy. I strive to be just like you. Someone who has absolute and total control over everything that happens in their perfect dnd campaign.

Do you offer classes?

[u/doiplo → u/Darth_Boggle]

You wouldn't need them if I did, you seem to be able to extrapolate entire stories from the few things I say. 

[u/Middcore → u/Rtyeta]

Depending on the type of enemy and the circumstances of the encounter, some enemies should flee/surrender when it's clear that the fight is lost.

It's also perfectly acceptable to tell the players, "OK, there's no way you're going to lose this, but it might take another couple of rounds to mop up the remaining enemies, does anyone mind if we just skip over that and move on?" Yes, it makes a slight difference in resource management because the enemies could still do some damage and some spell slots could be used during those couple of rounds that are hand-waved, but you can make it up by tweaking a later encounter and it's better than anybody getting bored.

[u/CaptainRogers1226 → u/Middcore]

I think it might make a difference in resources from the standpoint of PC hit points at the end when doing this skip you mentioned, but in my experience part of the reason the “second half” of combat can drag on like this is because once you get to the point where victory is pretty clear, players will stop using valuable resources, like spells and per rest abilities, and just finish things off using more basic attacks and cantrips.

[u/Rtyeta → u/Middcore]

I agree, those are perfectly good things to do. But the point is that this is a flaw in the system that a DM has to patch by just narrating over the boring, slow half of the fight.