Redefining Combat
BoomerI've been thinking about combat encounters in my game alot lately, and after nearly two years of 4E gaming, I'm still unhappy with 4E combat. It's an improvement over previous editions, but I think there's plenty of room for improvement. Combat is a slog. I've tried nerfing the monster HP while buffing attacks. I've tried putting my players on a timer. I've tried adding more interesting terrain. I've examined my DMing and table management critically...no matter what, a combat takes at least an hour and isn't exciting enough to keep all the players focused on the game.
I blame, in part, the fact every combat ends when the bad guys are dead or dying, or have run away. Those of you who read the column regularly know I'm ex-Army, so thinking about combat in tactical terms is an old job-skill of mine. Some of my other Veteran readers know that the military has precisely defined terminology for specific tactical actions in FM 3-90: Tactics. And I've been inspired by this favorite old manual to try and change the focus of combat encounters by using these well-defined terms, and redefining them for RPG Combat.
Not every "Tactical Task" used in FM 3-90 really fits D&D. And you may notice that some specific operations, like "ambush" are missing. I'll spare you the long explanation and say simply that most of those things don't define an end-state, and instead they define a method.
Here are some tactical tasks that can easily define an end-state and can allow your party to end combat without killing all the bad guys. Several of these tasks may also be great skill challenges. Finally, all of these tasks can be refined by adding a duration. For example, control these squares for X rounds = win or accomplish objective in X rounds or you lose. Also, when the players accomplish the objective, combat doesn't have to be over, but the combat can switch to narrative form.
You can turn this concept on it's head by also assigning monster objectives and directing the players to prevent the opponents from achieving their objective. Or giving the players and monsters a indirectly opposed tasks.
A note on durations
A typical D&D combat is designed to last about 5 rounds, keep this in mind when you attach a duration to your objective. In general, limit it to just one or two rounds.
Block
When the party's objective is to block the enemy, they have to prevent the enemy from accessing an area or advancing along a specific route. Gandalf's last stand in the mines of Moria is a great example of blocking the enemy. This type of battle can take a few forms. In one case, the party needs to delay the enemy to let an ally escape. In another, the party needs to cut the rope bridge down or rig up a deadfall. You might define this by identifying a line on the map and telling the party that they need to keep the enemy from crossing that line for a certain number turns. Creative parties may find a way to convert this to a skill challenge instead of combat or may end up combining a skill challenge with combat.
Breach
In a Breach, the party engages the enemy and breaks through the enemy line to create a passage to a specific point on the battlemap. You or the players can define a route and the party wins if they can keep the route open. This can also be the creation of a hole in the enemy defenses in the form of a portal or unlocked door or discovery and use of a secret passage through the castle defenses.
Bypass
In a Bypass, the party must move across the battlemap to a specific point on the battlemap without resorting to combat. They may use stealth, deception, surprise or other means to reach their objective without fighting. Form some scenarios, it may make more sense for the DM to say that it is only a success if they can cross without being detected. Or if detected, eliminating the observer without further detection. Think of it as slipping past the guards by putting them to sleep, or as scaling the castle walls during the changing of the guard to get to the King's chambers. This scenario should take place on a battle map, because the moment everything goes wrong, you'll want to have everyone in the right place on the map.
Clear
Clearing is the classic dungeon delve task. You eliminate all the enemy in a specific area, such as a room in a dungeon.
Contain
Containment requires the party to surround or otherwise trap the bad guys and prevent their escape. It's important to realize that containing the enemy can be as simple as closing all the exits and keeping the doors shut for a few rounds. After a few rounds, you can switch to narrative and suggest that the party was able to keep the bad guys trapped long enough to seal the door with an Arcane Lock.
Control
When the party's objective is control, the group needs to keep the enemy off of specific squares of the battlemap to prevent their use. For example, the party may guard a teleportation circle to prevent the enemies form using it. Or they may need to keep the enemies from getting into a specific room. This objective goes really well with a duration, and I'm sure you can think of lots of stories to support this idea.
Counterreconnaisance
In a counter-recon, the party needs to identify and eliminate observers. This can make a great skill challenge or it can be an interesting highly mobile skirmish where the party needs to take out specific targets.
Defeat
When the party's objective is to defeat the enemy, they achieve a total victory that ends the fight without needing to kill the enemy. This can be achieved through intimidation, surrender, unconsciousness or restraint.
Destroy
In contrast to defeat, a destroy objective requires the party to kill all opponents and permanently eliminate them
Disengage
To successfully disengage, the party needs to reach a specific area, away from the enemy that will allow them to escape with no chance of immediately successful pursuit. A great way to start this one off is to place the party on the map and inform them that they have been spotted by a superior force. For example, the duke's elite guards have you surrounded, but if you can win free of the guards and make it to the gate room, you may be able to shut the gates in their faces and escape.
Disrupt
To disrupt the enemy, the party needs to break apart the enemy or lock down a specific foe. You might tell the party that defeating the leader will end the combat. Or you might tell them that each opponent that is moved X squares away from the rest of the bad guys is defeated. Or you might suggest that if the party can get a slowed condition on all the bad guys, then the combat ends in victory.
Fix
Fixing requires the party to surrounds or otherwise trap the bad guys in a specific area for a specific duration.
Neutralize
Give the party a specific creature or item to control, restrain or destroy. If they can do so, the battle ends. In a sense, this can be considered the opposite of Secure
Secure
The party needs to protect a person, a place, or an object from being damaged or destroyed by the enemy. Caravan guard is a classic example of this, as well as bodyguard duty.
Seize
The party must move together to a specific location on the battlemap, remove all enemy from that area and stay in that area without losing it to the enemy.
The party succeeds in suppressing the enemy when they bloody all the foes. Alternately, if the party can afflict the majority of the opponents with a particular status effect or group of status effects, then they achieve victory.
You've probably gleaned from these tactical tasks you can define end states for an encounter by positional advantage or from target selection. This creates winning options that do not rely on defeating the opponent by hit point attrition.
I don't put much thought into my encounters outside of "boss" fights. I could see myself using a lot of the above ideas, and might just find a way to inch these into future games.
Recently I've been trying to think of ways to make boss encounters more fun and interesting, and have actually looked to warcraft for ideas. Encounters like Thadius in Naxxramas, where you need the right "buff" to deal damage to the boss, otherwise the damage you deal will heal them and hurt you. Something that gets my players on their toes.
A well put together and thought out overview on your ideas on D&D combat.
It is good insight and perhaps will be valuable when I consider how to do things the next time I get down to D&D again. :)
@ Arkus,
If you've been thinking about boss fights, then you'll need to take a look at my next article, with a working title of "The Trouble with Solos", that I'm publishing next weekend.
@KuraraII,
Thanks
I will look forward to that then :)
this is terrific! if Dragon magazine were still in print...this would make a great article :)
Have you thought about sending this in to WotC?? Its obviously very thought out and from someone who knows what hes talking about- in and OUT of the D&D system
new podcast idea- weekly D&D sessions!!! i know i for one would love that- that would also be a great way to see some of these ideas implemented
whos with me?? comment if you would love to see podcast D&D sessions!!
Ha, that's an idea I've been trying to sell these guys on for awhile.
I figured that at least filming a retro AD&D session would be interesting... :)
I did (and am) thinking about sending this in to Dungeon. I think that publishing it here precludes me from publishing it in Dungeon, if they'd even select my proposal.
We've all talked about podcasting our D&D sessions. The number 1 obstacle is that all the players at the table would have to agree to do it, and they probably won't. The next obstacle is that taping would be a major distraction if we did it "right" (i.e. if we had a camera man taking dynamic shots, as opposed to sticking the camera on a tripod). The next obstacle is that I think it would be boring. Finally, it would take alot of editing to fix the "boring" part and I don't have time right now to do that, and Roo and the Commodore are already up to their eyeballs in editing.
It's something we keep revisiting, and maybe if something changes we'll look at it again and reconsider.
I think it would be cool if you made a video showing how these House rules work at the least. give us a visual idea as well a a written idea so it would be better for everyone to grasp the idea. I for one learn by seeing and doing much better than readding from a book or on a webpage. (Not to say I can't learn from them. It's just easier if I see an Example).
As for the central topic. I like this idea better than just runnin and Gunnin like always.
One Idea I thougth was cool was an Idea that one of the guys from Penny arcade came up with. It was actually very interesting. It relied on the players trying to capture the monster with a magical Orb when there Health was low enough (Sound familar?) He actuallt stated that eh got the idea from Pokemon and his Players were eitherl aughing or Rolling there eyes at the idea. However, he said that it wasa lot fo fun because they had to mitigate and control the enemies HP as opposed to just let it die.
@dragono1130
Completely agree, and although the editing would be time consuming, the end product would be a fantastic way to show these house rules in action
This post inspired 2 questions over on RPG.StackExchange, "How do I signal that alternate tactical end states are possible?" and "How do I get players to assign alternate tactical goals?"
Thanks for a really interesting view on tactics and scenario building.