Taking 20 Podcast - Ep 216 - Should Players Plan During Combat?

Episode Date: March 25, 2024

Some groups keep combat conversations barebones, only allowing brief phrases to be exchanged during combat.  In this episode, I’ll give some pros and cons about allowing players to talk during combat and provide some tips for DMs who are unsure whether they’d allow this. #dmtips #gmtips #dnd #pf2e Resources: https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/13f4yva/dms_do_you_allow_your_players_to_talk_to_each/   https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/dungeon-masters-only/90847-combat-in-game-talking   https://www.reddit.com/r/DMAcademy/comments/112v0nf/do_you_let_your_players_discuss_tactics_in_combat/

This week on the Taking20 Podcast. When you allow your players to talk to each other during combat, they can coordinate their attacks and strategies more effectively. This will undoubtedly make the team more powerful in combat and the group will be more successful fighting baddies. And who doesn't enjoy that? Thank you for listening to the Taking 20 Podcast, episode 216, a debate about whether you should let players talk during combat.

I want to thank this week's sponsor, Blood Cells. Two of my blood cells fell in love with one another, but alas, it was all in vain. So I've got a half-formed idea, and I'd like to get your feedback on it. I'm thinking about offering a service where I would read text DMs need for their adventures, be it from letters, notices, voicemails, or NPC speeches. It would call attention to a particular item in your game that you would like to give a different voice to, for example. Something like, you say that you are cursed, your fortune spent, yet you abandoned love for madness, took solace in the bosom of another woman, and sired a stillborn son.

Cursed by darkness? Of that I have no doubt. Save you from your wretchedness? I think not. I much prefer you as you are, your dread lord and master, Strahd von Zarovich." Or maybe something like this. Hear ye, hear ye! Our great Lord Mayor, Barzilai Thrun, has issued the following proclamation.

The right to wear embroidered clothing in public is hereafter prescribed to anyone other than agents of House Thrun or the Holy Church of Asmodeus. Exceptions can be purchased at the city's discretion. Would pre-recorded audio files be something that you'd be interested in in your game? I would likely start out doing this for free and then possibly transition to providing some recordings for free to people who have donated to the podcast. Or do you have any thoughts or feedback about the idea or would you be interested in this service? And if so, please send me an email, feedback at taking20podcast.com or send me a direct message on social media.

I did get an email question this week asking where I get my topics from. Many of them are born from things that I've done right, and more likely wrong, in the past, and the painful lessons that I've learned. Sometimes though, a topic will come from an online discussion or post on social media, but this particular topic came from a local get-together with some of my fellow DM and GM friends. We'll meet for lunch to talk shops, swap war stories, and enjoy the company of those who do what we do. If you've never considered doing that by the way I would highly encourage you to set something like that up where you live and put announcements out on local gaming social media links and

in brick and mortar game stores. Anyway, we were talking about this and that and one of the DMs said they don't allow players to talk tactics mid combat. Another GM friend of mine chimed in that he ALWAYS allows them to do so and it sparked a rather spirited discussion about this. Well, much more spirited than I expected at least. It's not like names were called and punches get thrown and tables were flipped,

but a DM or two on each side of the argument got fairly worked up during the debate and it got me thinking about this. I was surprised by the passion in the argument since I thought it was common knowledge that we all run our games a little differently from each other. So I took some notes and came home to give this topic a good think.

The core question is whether you should let your players scheme, strategize, and discuss tactics around the table while combat is happening. Let's start with the obvious. Game how you want to game and game the way your players enjoy. If you want to allow extended discussions and even whiteboard sessions around the table while combat's going on, then bye, Gorum, have fun doing it. Wait, no, no, wait, wait, wait, I'm not done yet. Gee, don't be so quick on the end episode button. This will be a short episode, but I have lots more to say about this shit. I'll probably pay for that comment later. Conversely, if you want to ban conversations during combat at the table, then do that instead.

However, for you GMs who are on the fence about it, let's look at this logically and then talk about some pros and cons. First of all, in just about every tabletop role-playing game I play, they are played in rounds and in the most popular gaming systems like D&D, from 5e all the way far back however you want to go, both versions of Pathfinder, Starfinder, Morkborg, etc., rounds are about 6 seconds long. Cyberpunk has rounds as well, but they're only 3.3 seconds long because there are 3 rounds in a turn, and a turn is 10 seconds. I'm not going to get lost in the weeds here, but the point is, rounds have a fixed length of time and relatively short in most gaming systems.

How much can you realistically say in six seconds while moving around and swinging a sword? Some, sure, but you probably couldn't. You know what? Let's settle this. I have this digital recording device right in front of me with a built-in timer, so let's see how much I can read out of the Pathfinder Player Core Remaster introduction in a round. Pathfinder is a fantasy tabletop role-playing game where you and a group of friends gather to tell a tale of brave heroes. There it is, 21 words, 30 syllables, but that was while I was sitting in an air-conditioned office and not exerting myself at all. If you're on the fence and you're not sure if you should allow your players to discuss

tactics in combat, I want to lay out some pros, cons, and tips that I've learned through the years. There are a number of reasons why you might want to allow players to talk tactics during combat, even if their discussions would take much longer than six seconds. First of all, allowing tactical discussion fosters better teamwork. When you allow your players to talk to each other during combat, they can coordinate their attacks and strategies more effectively. This will undoubtedly make the team more powerful in combat and the group will be more successful fighting baddies. And who doesn't enjoy that? Secondly, talking tactics during combat

helps newer players learn the game. Players who haven't played a lot of tabletop RPGs or have not played this particular game system much can benefit from being able to talk to their more experienced teammates during combat. Should I use this ability? Is there something I probably won't hit this attack with, but is there anything else I can do to, say, help my fellow party members in their attacks? These discussions can help players learn the game and understand some combat strategies that can be used throughout their gaming... career? life? That sounds like tabletop RPGs are lethal, but they will benefit as long as they play RPGs. There, that's a better way

to say it. Another benefit to allowing talking during combat is that, while it's not realistic per se to have a 10-minute conversation while arrows and spells are flying around, it's rational to think that they would have already had these conversations. In real life, people would be able to talk to each other outside of combat. Extended conversations about combat maneuvers and tactics would likely happen at camp or while the party's exploring. The characters spend more time together than the players do, so it makes sense that the characters would have discussed the best ways to fight together. I can do this and if I do this then you do that and then we'll all be better for it. Allowing

players to talk during combat can make the game more realistic and immersive in a lot of ways. This group starts out as individuals and gradually come to know each other including the way they fight. It would make sense that the characters would know more about each other than they possibly could be portrayed at the table, so discussion may be warranted. However, there are some potentially negative aspects of allowing players to discuss tactics during combat. The most obvious drawback of this is that these discussions will slow down the pace of combat. It can bring the game to a screeching halt when two players argue about whether the paladin should move

adjacent to the minotaur with a halberd, take a potential attack of opportunity to do so, and possibly lose an attack versus staying where they are and attacking the Janasi sorcerer. But the rogue wants to get the extra sneak attack damage from flanking and the debate starts. Meanwhile the other players get bored and they're looking at your notes behind the screen and the conversation drones on and on and on. This can be frustrating for players who just want to get on with the game already. One of the most, I'll say, emphatic points made during the discussion at lunch was that combat conversations can

give players an advantage in combat. Players who are able to talk to each other during combat, much longer than six seconds would allow, have an unfair advantage over their opponents, which are not allowed to talk. I'll grant you that's true. That was an important point made at lunch. However, 999 times out of a thousand, who's running the opponents of the PCs? Is it 16 different people that are DMing? No, it's one. The DM. And can this DM have a conversation with

themselves simulating conversations between enemy combatants? You bet they could. Therefore, if the DM is playing the opponents as smart and capable opponents, they're working in tandem, flanking, teaming up on one PC, and so forth. If these baddies work together regularly, like they're an opposing party, they are servants of the same big bad, or whatever, they would have talked tactics, just like the PCs would. Even creatures with animal intelligence who hunt in packs like wolves would have well-defined tactics and know how to work together.

You can probably tell which way I'm leaning in this conversation, by the way. I tend to let players talk tactics during combat because I think my games are better for it. I play most combatants as intelligent and allowing the players to talk gives them an advantage over most baddies I would throw at them. However, I do have a couple of tips for DMs out there who are thinking about allowing mid-combat chatter.

One, even if you do allow conversation, keep the game moving. out there who are thinking about allowing mid-combat chatter. 1. Even if you do allow conversation, keep the game moving. Two players arguing about what tactics to follow can create hurt feelings between them and can make the game boring or worse uncomfortable for the other players at the table. So how do you keep the game moving? Tip number 2. Allow conversation, but consider setting a time limit on those conversations. One minute feels like plenty of time to discuss what the character should do next. If

discussion lasts longer than that put them on a countdown. Give audible and or visual cues that their discussion time is going to be running out soon like use an hourglass or what I have it's just digital timer. Tip number three. I allow players to talk but now is not the time for extended debates. I use the timer if I have to but usually saying something like I realize this hasn't been decided yet but Brennan it's your character's turn what would you like her to do? That usually gets the game moving forward again. And tip number four. If one or more of your players are habitual offenders of taking

way too long to take their turn in combat, talk to that player one-on-one. Ask them to help you keep the game moving by taking their turns faster. I mentioned I use a digital timer and I keep it behind my screen when I game in person. I'll throw one up on the screen if we're gaming around the virtual tabletop. I don't use it often and I tend to take a softer edge on this when compared to something like tabletop. I don't use it often, and I tend to take a softer edge on this when compared to something like metagaming, but it is a tool I use when I have to. I give my players fair warning before it comes out, so they're not surprised. Ultimately it's up to the GM and the players to discuss whether the PCs will be allowed

to talk much during combat. While talking during combat may not be realistic, it's not unreasonable to think that the PCs would have discussed their tactics ahead of time. Make a decision whether you'll allow it and discuss it with your players. Consider limiting discussions to a certain length of time to keep the game moving, and if you do, I'd be willing to bet that you and your players would have fun doing it. If you enjoy the podcast, please like, rate, or subscribe to it wherever you found it, and I would greatly appreciate it if you could leave it a review as well. Tune in next week when I'm going to have a new episode in the Monster series that was

suggested by one of the listeners, part two of All About Dragons. But before I go, I want to thank this week's sponsor, Blood Cells. After the breakup I mentioned earlier, neither of the Blood Cells really became depressed. I guess all they could be is positive. This has been episode 216, Pros and Cons of Allowing Players to Talk During Combat. My name is Jeremy Shelley, and I hope that your next game is your best game.

The Taking 20 podcast is a Publishing Cube Media Production. Copyright 2024. References to game system content or copyright their respective publishers.