D&D 5E Battlemap Vs. Theater of the Mind

H

Huber_D

First Post

• Apr 18, 2015

• #1

Do you find that there's a difference in the time drag of Battlemap combat as opposed to Theater of the Mind combat?

Let's assume pre-drawn maps to eliminate the time it takes the GM to draw.

 

log in or register to remove this ad

Agamon

Adventurer

• Apr 18, 2015

• #2

I think it's a wash. There's needing to move minis around with a battle mat, but there's sometimes positioning questions from the players without. I play with minis in my 5e game, and without in Savage Worlds game. I see it just more as a preference.

 

Psikerlord#

Explorer

• Apr 18, 2015

• #3

I find TotM faster, more flexible (for players and DM), more involving and more fun.

 

Cyan Wisp

Explorer

• Apr 18, 2015

• #4

I haven't played TotM since 1e. Even then, as a DM, I would still have a "battlemat" effectively - the map of the dungeon (10 ft./square), sometimes even tactical maps (5 ft./square), so I would be loosely adjudicating actions based on that. Heck, we didn't even pay that much attention to movement rates or area effects. It was fast and loose, but it meant that a lot of fudging went on. We didn't care.

I prefer battlemats - nay, I prefer gridless crafted terrain! Check out this place or my Sunless Citadel if you don't know what I mean.

I like seeing the layout. All of the players see what I see and can plan ahead based on positioning and shared environment. As Agamon says, a preference thing.

Speedwise, I think TotM is probably faster, but you might sacrifice some of the nuances of the game. Battlemats are still fast, just for different reasons (everyone on the same page, planning ahead easier, environment more tangible, cover and sightlines easily established).

 

Rhenny

Adventurer

• Apr 19, 2015

• #5

At the table I find Theater of the Mind quicker and more flexible. If I need to I can always use tokens or minis for relative positioning or draw something out to show the players what's going on.

Most of my games are run on Fantasy Grounds online now so using grid and theater of the mind is pretty much the same. I will say though, when my players are really concentrating and we are in a groove, theater of the mind flows better and players take less time to make decisions. When we use the grid, sometimes decision making and square counting takes up more time.

 

vandaexpress

First Post

• Apr 19, 2015

• #6

Depends on the size of the battle and the complexity of the tactics and spells being used. TotM definitely can be faster for small encounters at low levels. Once you start adding participants though and throwing around AOE, it starts to slow down as players ask more questions and need more clarification on positioning etc that would be automatic with a battlemat.

Unless it's something like a solo guard in a corridor getting jumped, I stick with battlemats now (well, the equivalent, I use roll20 and project the map onto my table).

 

Queer Venger

Dungeon Master is my Daddy

• Apr 19, 2015

• #7

I've used minis since 1e. I find that the difference in time is negligible, the added realism and tactile immersion is worth the time of using minis.

 

Talmek

Explorer

• Apr 19, 2015

• #8

My group prefers battle mats - as I DM I would like to try adjudicating via TotM at some point but I feel that I'm too new to try and keep up with battle positioning, opportunity attacks and all the other combat rules mentally. To be completely honest I struggle just to keep initiative under control!

As a player of many, many campaigns I always preferred TotM over battle mats. I enjoyed being able to visualize the scene and listening to other players come up with descriptions and desired effects.

 

M

MechaPilot

Explorer

• Apr 19, 2015

• #9

Agamon said:

I think it's a wash. There's needing to move minis around with a battle mat, but there's sometimes positioning questions from the players without. I play with minis in my 5e game, and without in Savage Worlds game. I see it just more as a preference.

Click to expand...

That is precisely how it has always worked out for me, and the problem of positioning questions gets worse if you have any of the following:

A small encounter space.

A lot of enemies crowded into the encounter space.

Irregular terrain features.

Multiple levels of altitude in the encounter space.

Terrain features that move on their own.

Trapped sections of the encounter space.

and so on.

 

Warmaster Horus

Explorer

• Apr 19, 2015

• #10

I like both. Battlemats are nice for larger parties and narrative for smaller ones, in my experience.