Gridless combats - How do you do it?

[seskis281]

I have never used a grid or miniatures.

I have used a whiteboard, using very rudimentary floorplans or reference marks on it,

I've used a couple of dice just to show relative positions;

In the campaign I'm running now, I try to rely mainly on the idea of the imagination - describing as viscerally as possible the layout the characters see before them, the arrangement of the battle, etc.

My best suggestion is to go with the whiteboard with dry - erase, and use it as simplistically as possible (Xs and Os-style).

 

[Ed_Laprade]

Communication is definitely key. Remember, the characters can see where everything is. That's why I'd never go back to spoken descriptions, it's way too easy to miss something important. (Remember all those arguments that started: "Well, if I'd realized that's what you ment, I would've done this instead...")

 

[DragonLancer]

I don't use grids when DMing. Its all a mixture of imagination and communication. It means being a little more flexible than when using a grid, but IMX it works better as the game does not bog down into chess.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Thinking about reverting to gridless combats in my new campaign. The goal here is not debating "To Grid or not to Grid", let's say I have my reasons, the main one being that there's no way my players can stay in-character when they are plotting their next move over squares and minis. I want them to start using their imagination again and force out the math, range calculation, area-of-effect optimization and such.

So I'm calling you Gridless DMs : How do you do it efficiently? I remember the good ol' AD&D days when player A would picture a completely different battlefield than player B or the DM. Been thinking about keeping a map for myself and summarizing the whereabouts to the players only when the situation warrants it.

Anyone wanna share their tips and tricks?

-Marcon

Warhammer & Warhammer 40K are wargames that deal a lot of with facing, movement, flanking, etc and they use no grids. It's simple enough to get a ruler to measure the movement of the miniatures - 30' in mini scale is 6" on the table. You can use templates for area effect spells. I have a special (el cheapo) ruler that came with the Warhammer fantasy box set - it's basically a pencil thin plastic rod with measurements up to 12 or 15 inches on it. It works very well for any sort of wargaming... sometimes, the retractable tape measure is a bit bulky for the table top.

It actually makes things a bit easier in the long run, once you get used to it. You just move in a straight line for 6" if you want to go diagonally across the table-top, instead of counting 1 for the first diagonal square, then 2 for the next one, etc (or is it 2 for the first diagonal square, then 1?)

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

... let's say I have my reasons, the main one being that there's no way my players can stay in-character when they are plotting their next move over squares and minis. I want them to start using their imagination again and force out the math, range calculation, area-of-effect optimization and such.

You're really not going to like 4E then.

 

[seskis281]

You're really not going to like 4E then.

Ya, 4e is geared towards wargaming with combat mechanics as central, or so it seems. Nothing at all wrong with that, if your cup of tea is minature wargaming with the heavy influence of MMORG and video "hero" concepts - limit breaks, automatic powers, etc.

It does veer it further away from the "old fashioned" pen-and-paper rpg, though that would lead me and the thread off-track and back into flame wars between "role-" and "roll-" playing, so I'll end my thought there and slip quickly back under my rock....

 

[Marcon]

Ya, 4e is geared towards wargaming with combat mechanics as central, or so it seems. Nothing at all wrong with that, if your cup of tea is minature wargaming with the heavy influence of MMORG and video "hero" concepts - limit breaks, automatic powers, etc.

It does veer it further away from the "old fashioned" pen-and-paper rpg, though that would lead me and the thread off-track and back into flame wars between "role-" and "roll-" playing, so I'll end my thought there and slip quickly back under my rock....

You nailed it right there, didn't want to start a flame war or something but I can't deny that 4e previews are directly related to the original post. I'll probably be running a Ravenloft campaign, fights will be few and far between, most likely not in a dungeon and I'd like to retain the power to fiddle things a bit for horror's sake.

Never been that much of a tactician, I'm sure I can't compete with 4-5 heads working against me to use the new powers in a way I haven't predicted and will send the BBEG to a premature (And anti-climactic) demise. I'm fully aware this also steers me towards another game system, at best sticking with a modified 3.5 or something "different" such as C&C.

-Marcon

 

[moritheil]

Oh, this came up in Rules recently. Basically, you just need to be aware of what is or is not possible.

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=221062

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Ya, 4e is geared towards wargaming with combat mechanics as central, or so it seems.

Yeah, unfortunately.

I was reading about Gygax's passing and how he lamented the shift away from storytelling to tactical battle mapping and I'm growing increasingly concerned about the direction 4E is going.

Don't get me wrong, I could put up with the 3E level of tabletop play but 4E seems to be taking it yet another step further.

Which, IMO, is a sign of lazy game designing. Anybody can come up with tabletop rules. It's the storytelling that's hard.

 

[SavageRobby]

One thing you can do with flanking - which requires a lot more precision in description to be useful - is to do something like Savage Worlds does. Instead of a flanking bonus, the system provides a Gang-Up bonus based on the number of allies that are attacking a given enemy. The more allies are attacking, the higher the bonus (+1 per ally, up to +4 total).

Heck, even with a grid, thats a lot easier to track than flanking. Plus I like what it represents; the distraction of trying to fend off multiple enemies.