How to Run Fun Combat in a Stand-and-Deliver System

Medieval Knights Engaged in Combat

What’s “stand and deliver”? I’m glad you asked. Stand-and-deliver combat is the style of combat still used by most RPGs, D&D being the most well known. PCs roll initiative, take an action on their turn,* then repeat. Most of the time, that action will be to attack the enemy. Each round represents a few seconds in real time. Participants have a pool of abstract hit points to represent their physical health. The vast majority of combat is spent in one spot, delivering damage to the enemy. Hence, “stand and deliver.”

The Problems With Stand and Deliver

Unfortunately, for a method that’s so common, stand-and-deliver combat is remarkably bad. One of the first complaints experienced gamers start making is how boring combat is. This is worse in some systems than others, but it’s nearly universal. Combat is referred to as “slow,” “a slog,” or “impossible to understand.”

These combat systems don’t create any interesting tactical choices, and they certainly don’t help tell a good story. Consider Delta Green, one of the less terrible systems in this category. Characters who get into a fight will almost always stand in one place and shoot at the enemy until one side runs out of hit points. The GM or PCs can narrate that their characters are more active, but according to the rules they’re standing still. That’s terrible for an atmosphere of desperate horror, which is what Delta Green is trying to create.

Worse, none of these systems know what hit points actually represent. In Delta Green, a rifle deals 1d12 of damage. On a 12, most humans will instantly die. On a 1, it’s nothing. So is a low-damage roll supposed to represent a graze? If so, shouldn’t that be more contingent on a character’s skill? A better marksman should be better able to put their round in the target’s head or center of mass, but with the rules as written, a death shot is just as likely as a minor cut, no matter how good the character is at shooting.

If your group actually enjoys stand-and-deliver combat, then you’ve no need to read further. But for everyone else, don’t worry – I’m here to tell you how to make combat in these systems fun.

Throwing Out the Rules

The sad truth is that stand-and-deliver rules are always bad. So your first step when trying to make this kind of combat fun is to throw out most of the rules. Initiative rules, damage rules, movement rules: all of it must go.

The only thing you’ll be keeping is whatever core mechanic PCs use to take actions. In Delta Green, that’s the percentile die roll, trying to get equal to or under the character’s skill. In Legend of the Five Rings, it’s the Skill+Stat roll with d10s. You’ll need this core mechanic so that the PCs can interact with the world, but the rest is history.

A final consideration for throwing out the rules is what to do with abilities your PCs took that are useless without the system’s combat mechanics. Improved Initiative doesn’t help much if no one rolls for initiative. To keep players from feeling like they’ve wasted their points, I recommend granting them a bonus to their core roll whenever one of these abilities feels relevant. Improved Initiative would certainly be relevant if your PC needs to disarm a ticking bomb before it goes off.

This might sound scary at first. How will you handle combat without all those rules to support you? Don’t worry, I’ll explain how. Those rules weren’t actually supporting you anyway. Instead, they were forcing you into a bad dynamic of play that has survived almost unchanged since the first roleplaying game. Time to move beyond them.

Choosing a Mood

Before you can do anything else, you’ll need to decide what mood you’re going for in this combat. A near infinite amount of possible moods exist, but for roleplaying combat, these three come up most often.

  • Dramatic Action: The default for most blockbuster films. Bullets fly everywhere as the protagonist jumps their motorcycle over an exploding tank. Starfighters fill the sky, arcing in elegant and deadly loops. Swords flash in the morning sun as master fencers clash on the field of honor.
  • Gritty Bloodsport: Death and gore central. Monsters tear people limb from limb. Heavily muscled mutants carve through flesh and body armor alike with terrifying claws. Living alien tanks explode in showers of acidic blood.
  • Horrific Realism: Combat that’s as close to the real thing as you can feasibly make it. People with minor-looking wounds die of shock or blood loss. A grenade leaves combatants on both sides with permanent hearing loss. Swords inflict terrible wounds that never heal right. There can be dark comedy here, because real combat is darkly absurd, but the horror is primary.

Sometimes the mood is obvious from the system. In Delta Green, nearly every fight should be horrific realism. In A Song of Ice and Fire, gritty bloodsport is the default. In other systems, the mood will be less obvious. Legend of the Five Rings can feature dramatic action when two honorable samurai meet on the field, and gritty bloodsport takes over when demonic armies rise from the Pit of Fu Leng to feast on the living.

It’s also possible to blur the line between moods a bit. Perhaps you want a combat that’s mostly dramatic action, but you plan to wink at horrific realism by having a minor NPC die from an infected wound. Whatever the case, figuring out what mood you want is paramount because that mood will flavor everything else you do.

Making a Plan for Your Bad Guy

Next, look at your party’s opposition. What do they want, and what can they do? This assumes that it’s not a PVP fight, because PVP is its own can of worms.

Determining the Bad Guy’s Objective

First, know the opposition’s objective. In most cases, you’ll want to make it something other than “kill the PCs.” Killing the PCs is an objective that usually can’t be achieved without doing critical damage to your story.

Instead, give the bad guys an objective they can succeed at. Perhaps they want to steal a vital piece of gear or demolish a fortress the PCs need. If the villains succeed sometimes, it will make them far more threatening. That will enhance everyone’s enjoyment. If you really want a goal where the bad guys tries to kill the PCs, save it for the climax of a major story arc or somewhere it’s actually feasible to lose a protagonist.

For example, if you’re planning a game of Mage and want the Technocrats to attack the PCs’ sanctum, first consider what the Technocrats are after. They might consider it a bonus to kill some mages, but their main objective shouldn’t require PC death. Perhaps they’re after the reality node at the sanctum’s center.

Factoring in the Bad Guy’s Abilities

Next, look at what the bad guys can do. Consider how they will use their abilities to accomplish their objective. Plan it like you are the villains’ leader, and their objective is your objective. If the bad guys can fly, they’ll probably make an aerial attack. If they have primarily ranged weapons, they’ll attack from a distance.

Your goal here is not to defeat the PCs but to create enemies that act like they’re trying to defeat the PCs. Your players will notice if the bad guys are pulling punches, and resentment will build. If you can’t imagine the PCs winning, then reduce the bad guys’ strength.

How your bad guys use their abilities will depend a lot on the mood of your combat. In dramatic-action combat, those abilities will be flashy and obvious. In a horrifically realistic fight, the enemy will almost certainly try to gain the element of surprise.

For example, let’s say you’re preparing a Delta Green scenario where four cultists need to get inside a fortified compound and kill a witness that the PCs are guarding. The cultists have spells that let them phase through solid matter. You decide their most likely plan would be to approach the base as stealthily as possible, then walk through the walls of unoccupied rooms to reach their targets. You also realize that there’s no way the PCs can hunt down four cultists who can walk through walls, so you reduce the number to two.

Planning for Your PCs

Now it’s time to repeat the last step, except with your PCs.

Consider the PCs’ Objective

Sometimes you won’t have to wonder what their objective is because they’ll tell you. If they say, “We’re assaulting that hill so we have somewhere to set up our catapult,” then, congratulations, you know their objective.

Other times it won’t be so easy. Your PCs might tell you, “We start a fight with those guys” and then say nothing else. This could be because they’re using the default objective of “we fight until one of us is dead,” or because they don’t realize they should make their desires known.

Either way, you can have trouble. If every combat is a fight to the death, it’ll get boring quickly. And if you don’t know what the PCs’ objective is, you can’t facilitate it properly. Ask your players what they want to accomplish with this fight, and take some time to let them figure it out. For example, let’s say you’re running a Legend of the Five Rings campaign, and the PCs are planning to assault an enemy castle. Their ultimate objective might be to capture the enemy lord alive or burn the castle’s grain silos. Make sure you know which it is ahead of time, or you might not remember to include their objective in the battle.

If the players can’t agree on an objective, it’s fine for them to pursue separate goals. Half of the party might want to capture the enemy lord while the other half is set on burning the grain. The players should understand they’re not all trying for the same objective and not expect the rest of the party to back them up.

Another situation where it’s difficult to know the PCs’ objective is when you’re planning an ambush. You don’t want to spoil the surprise by asking in advance. In this case, consider how the bad guys’ actions are likely to endanger something the PCs care about. If the enemy fleet drops out of hyperspace above the PCs’ homeworld, you can be fairly sure the party’s objective will be to defend their planet.

Accounting for PC Abilities

The PCs’ abilities will also feature heavily in combat, and you’ll want to plan a fight where as many PCs as possible get to do something useful. Sometimes this is easier than others. It’s easy to make combat skills matter in a fight. It’s harder if a PC is mostly invested in social or mental abilities, but it’s still doable. Perhaps a diplomat’s persuasion skill will be useful in convincing bystanders to assist, or perhaps a scientist’s chemistry skill will be mandatory for countering the enemy’s deadly acid breath.

Remember not to stage a fight that the PCs can automatically win, unless you think they really need a self-esteem boost. If one PC has the ability to control metal, the bad guys shouldn’t be entirely made up of androids or else you’ll be in for a boring scene.

In my previous Legend of the Five Rings example, if one of the PCs has high ranks in the Battle skill, you might make the castle’s defenses formidable. Next you might consider how another PC’s fire spells will affect the combat, and so on.

Creating Turning Points

Now you’re at the stage of actually running the combat* and not just preparing for it. You threw out the rules, but you still want to roll some dice. So when are you supposed to roll them?

The trick is to focus on turning points in the battle, moments in time when the tides of fortune can shift to favor one side or another. Each turning point should require a roll with clear stakes. If PC Shawna succeeds on her sword roll, the enemy general is wounded and must retreat. If she fails, she takes a wound and must pull back. Alternatively, if you want the enemy general to retreat no matter what happens, PC Shawna’s roll can be to determine if she manages it without taking damage. This isn’t whether or not a PC with high ranks in firearms can hit the enemy, but whether they can take the enemy down before a grenade is thrown.

You’ve already considered how your PCs’ abilities will affect the fight, and now it’s time to put that into practice. Any powerful ability can be used in a turning point. PCs with a high sword skill should have the opportunity to clash blades with a formidable enemy. If your party contains an ice mage, stopping an avalanche makes an excellent turning point. If a PC has absolutely no abilities that can realistically affect the fight, that’s fine too; make their turning point an internal one. The gun-shy newbie might have to roll willpower to keep from breaking when the enemy attacks. This still gives them a moment in the spotlight.

Sometimes your players will helpfully provide a turning point for you. If you describe the enemy charge, and a player says, “I raise a wall of earth to block their advance,” then you have a turning point ready to go. Facilitate these turning points whenever possible so your players will feel more involved with the combat.

Ideally, you’ll want at least one turning point for each PC participating in the conflict. If you like, each PC’s turning-point roll can be in support of a roll for the overall conflict. PC Luther is leading his squad into battle, so you can save his tactics roll until the other PCs have faced their turning points and then assign Luther bonuses and penalties based on how everyone else did. It also works fine to make each turning point independent of the others. This makes them a series of smaller objectives within the larger fight. Don’t worry if one character gets more spotlight than the others, especially if that character has an ability that’s critical to winning the fight. Give the other PCs a chance to shine later.

There’s no hard number for how many turning points there should be in a given fight, but I’ve found that three is a good place to start. Fewer than that, and the fight doesn’t feel very big. But the battle shouldn’t take too long. That’s why you threw out all the rules earlier. Six or seven turning points is the most you’ll need for all but the most epic of fights.

Narrating What Happens in Between

You’ve gotten the hard parts out of the way, so now all that’s left is to narrate what goes on between turning points. This is when it’s most important to know what the mood of your combat is. If you describe a horror scenario like a dramatic-action scene, you’ll damage the game’s atmosphere.

Keep your description on the short side. Three or four lines is usually the most you’ll ever need. More than that and the players will lose interest. This limit is flexible for those who are really good at description, so use your own discretion.

Your description shouldn’t require any rolls, at least not until you threaten something the PCs care about. You can narrate the enemy shock troops blowing a hole in the keep wall, but if they’re going to kidnap a PC’s true love, you should be prepared to roll dice. If a PC ever interrupts your description with “hang on, I want to stop them from doing that,” then you know it’s time for a turning point.

Once you’ve gotten to the final turning point, it’s time to narrate the combat’s end. Describe the enemy retreating in disorder if your PCs have done well or standing victorious if the dice have been cruel. That’s it; your job for this combat is done. Time to move on with your story. Throwing out the rules and doing this yourself will feel weird at first, but I guarantee it will lead to a more positive experience for all. There’s a good chance you’re already doing it to some degree, and you just need permission to go all the way.

Treat your friends to an evening of dark ritual murder. In a fictional game scenario, of course. Uncover your lost memories and save the day in our stand-alone game, The Voyage.

Read more about ,



  1. Adam Reynolds

    One major thing I find to be the fatal flaw(for certain PCs, literally) with games like this is the lack of any mechanic that encourages anything other than using your most powerful attack and fighting to the death. There really should be a means in which you can concede the fight and give in, going on to refight at some later point.

    In The Empire Strikes Back, Luke didn’t fight to the death against Vader, he surrendered the fight and got out alive before it was too late. The same is even more true in reality, in which the overwhelming majority of major battles end with one side either surrendering or retreating. Even those that were often thought to fight to the last man, like Imperial Japan in WW2, retreated more often that people realized(Guadalcanal being a major example).

    Hardly anyone in either fiction or reality fights to the death. It is nice to have rules that reflect this. I know that Fate and Cortex+ explictly have this as rules, but I don’t know of many others that do, especially not without relying on meta-mechanics.

  2. Bronze Dog

    Going to be joining a Star Wars: Edge of the Empire game, soon. The GM and I are in a feedback loop, geeking out over what we love about the franchise, so he’s motivated to start it up. I’ll be paying attention to how he handles combat, and one thing my swoop racer will be attempting, sooner or later, is bringing a vehicle to a firefight.

    Currently in a Werewolf: The Apocalypse (20th Anniversary edition) and so far combats happen pretty quick. Thanks in part to werewolves being “Murder. Machines.” as the GM likes to put it.

    • Bronze Dog

      First EotE fight in the adventure: Fighting retreat. We’re outnumbered, but fortunately, the enemy recruited some apparently inexperienced fighters to block our rear, and thought it’d be okay since they were expecting to intimidate us into surrender. Bounty hunter throws a grenade to scatter the main force, while I use the surprise and a very good initiative roll to stun their newbies and book it for the elevator. All the while, we’ve got an unarmed NPC and a captive to take care of.

      Made a nice scene.

  3. Geroto

    What’s happen if the PCs objectives is kill the enemy? In the example the enemy general run way after one sucessfull hit of Shawna. But in a combat the player can decide kill the general. Kill the general is a turn point that can be acomplished with only one sucessfull dice roll? And if need more dice roll that not equivalent of Hit Points?
    And in this case “PCs with a high sword skill should have the opportunity to clash blades with a formidable enemy.”. The clash with formidable enemy is resolved with only one roll when the formidable enemy runway if suceed or the PC runway if is fail?

    • Oren Ashkenazi

      If I understand your question correctly, killing the enemy can totally be a PC objective, so long as it isn’t overused. If the PC’s goal is to kill the Dark Lord or what have you, then you have to throw some obstacles in their way, the same way you would with any objective.

      The Dark Lord is surrounded by combat droids that the PC has to get past. The Dark Lord has a magical forcefield that the PC must figure out how to break. All of these are potential turning points. The final roll would be to determine if the Dark Lord is killed, be that via a sword fight, sniper shot to the head, etc.

      The only thing is that if a villain is killed, they can’t be used again. This is potentially a problem if you’re trying to create a recurring enemy, which is why you should work with your players to create a variety of objectives.

      • Void Caller

        I think that question is “what about all of the times when single roll
        combat resolution hurts a game?”.

        In @Geroto’s example this is about situations when PC fights a formidable enemy, so combat being resolved in one roll does not make sense.

        • Oren Ashkenazi

          That’s fair, but I’m not actually talking about single roll resolution.

          If the physical confrontation with the enemy is important enough to warrant more than one roll, you can apply this method to that too. It might go something like this.

          “The Dark Lord swings at your head, roll dodge!”
          “You think you see a pattern in his movements. Roll Knowledge: Fencing.”
          “You see a weakness in the Dark Lord’s stance. Roll Sword to go in for the kill.”

          Now that’s not the same as the more tactical experience of a full combat, but very few systems have combat rules good enough to actually deliver a fun experience. In most systems, you’d just attack the Dark Lord until he ran out of HP and it would take a long time.

  4. Nathan

    I think there’s a happy medium. I know more story focused players would like it, but like a story based system, its not for every player. I nearly had riots moving from physical to digital minis, throwing out what accounts for 50 percent of a player’s character sheet, character progression and tactical outlet would be a death knell for some campaigns.

    As I read this article, I could see inputing easily the turning points and goals and playing the other rules fairly loose, applying mechanical game speedup bonuses for turning points and creating win and lose conditions for the goals.

    Once enemies achieve their goal of combat in my game, which is rarely ever defeat the party, i have a set scene, altered for the everchanging situation, of the enemy achieving that goal, it’s a cinematic few sentences. I could add a turning point to those end scenes that is optional, that could result in an extra success for the enemy or a slightly less success.

  5. Slayd

    I DM quite frequently for 5e D&D games, and I usually take inspiration from the battle master maneuvers for things you can do in combat- tripping, feinting, ect. It’s a bit of a balancing act, but I have fun with it

  6. Justin St-Amant

    I would be interested in reading more on this topic. I came across this blog and post two years ago, and I still regularly come back for reference. If anyone can point me and other readers to similar content, i.e. dropping combat rules in order to run combat more narratively, that would be greatly appreciated!

    I’m always in an ongoing struggle to simplify my RPGs. My highest priorities as a GM is to keep a game moving and to keep my players captivated. I quickly found out that cutting-down on the rules is the easiest way to achieve this, as well as the necessary first-step.

    I’ve successfully ran games like this for 3 different groups of players. In my experience, this works well with new players and works best with players that are focused on role-playing. However, I find that my players that are only familiar with D&D meet this kind of gaming with resistance.

    The key to running this style of game, where combat is treated the same as other action-resolution, is open and constant communication with the players. As a GM, it’s important for me to know everyone’s intentions in-game so that I can fairly adjudicate and make everyone feel involved. If I can get my players to feel involved, the game/story becomes an organic conversation between us. At that point, the game is very collaborative. My D&D players on the other hand (or any players that are familiar with a game’s ruleset), don’t usually contribute their intentions. They’ll name the actions they are taking in a round without describing what their character is thinking. Of course, I could ask them directly what their intentions are, but this kind of board-game mentality brings up a whole other topic and is toxic to this kind of role-play.

Leave a Comment

Please see our comments policy (updated 03/28/20) and our privacy policy for details on how we moderate comments and who receives your information.