Is this question stackable, and if not, can it be rehabilitated?

In our current game, the PCs are getting pwned by a couple of bad guys. We ended last session in the middle of combat and will pick up next session. This combat in particular is not going our way and perhaps different strategies are called for. We are struggling with what is a suitable amount of between-session discussion, since the characters are literally frozen in time in mid-combat.

At your table, what approaches have worked for strategizing ongoing combat?

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I’ve created the [workshop-question] tag, we’ve got a handful of questions like this, and I think it would be good to have a tag for them so we can pull them all up. Right now you’ve just got to be clever with searches. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 19, 2022 at 20:44
  • \$\begingroup\$ Part of the issue is that by giving the PC players days between sessions to discuss and share information then perhaps they are sharing information unknowable to the characters . . . what spells each have prepared, for instance, or planning a coordinated attack that the characters would not be able to communicate in the moment. \$\endgroup\$
    – Jack
    Commented Mar 19, 2022 at 20:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ In our particular case, actually the GM resolved it completely since I posted the original question by saying "yeah, go ahead, discuss whatever you want", and personally I think this is completely satisfactory, so I don't even have a problem or question any more. I think any amount of coordination we do between sessions only reinforces that these characters have been adventuring with each other for a long, long time, and can reasonably work together in ways we the players would not be able to do without similar experience together. \$\endgroup\$
    – Jack
    Commented Mar 19, 2022 at 20:59

2 Answers 2


What’s the problem here? What outcome are you trying to work toward?

I can’t tell that there is a problem to solve here or a goal to aim for, so it seems like more of a discussion survey. Do you see something wrong with talking about the game in between sessions? Is there some favorable or unfavorable outcome you anticipate if the players do one thing or another? “What approaches have worked” isn’t a question we can answer with the little information you’ve given us about your goals. Worked for what? Worked for the party overcoming the challenge? Worked for the party not thinking of a way to cheese the ongoing encounter? Worked for keeping the players interested and excited for more next game?

Right now, it’s just an open ended survey with no clear objective. As written, I would VTC for “needs details”, but if you can tell us some more about what outcome you’re trying to achieve, and maybe why you think just letting the players talk if they want would be detrimental to that outcome, I think there is a good question here.

  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Also pretty important detail for questions like this is also fairly often "How do you actually want things to turn out?" For example, is surrendering to the bad guys okay, or do they need to go down? This means instead of speculating about various different ways it could be resolved on different terms, we can focus on achieving the specific goals the querent has and offer anything else as secondary options (like “you can do your thing this way, here's a good explanation of how, but also consider alternatives like surrendering”). \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 19, 2022 at 16:39

Stackable as Written

This is a fine question as written, assuming it identifies a system.

I would answer it with essentially the same answer I gave here: Speaking in combat as character vs. Discussing tactics

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ As outlined in my answer, I’m not even sure what the question is asking for. But since you think it is perfectly fine as written, maybe you could explain what the question is looking for? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 27, 2022 at 13:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .