D&D 5E Brainstorming TotM

robus said:

I think this might be a failure of a DM narrating the results of the action. With TotM (as Iserith noted above) narration is key. The DM has to keep telling the story of the battle and reminding the players of their situation. It also requires the players to pay attention. Nothing worse for a DM to hear, after a clear narration of the players current situation, “err what’s my situation?”

Click to expand...

This is one of the biggest issues I've had with TotM in the past... it requires all of the players to be 100% invested at all times. Some of my players can tend to "tune out" when they're not directly acting. Though the points made about remembering "Step 1" of the Narrative loop are really good. That is a failing that I have had narrating TotM. This is where I see the onus of the "heavy lifting" falling on the DM in these situations; having to keep the spatial situation active in my head while coherently putting that across to the players. That is the place where some hard-wired tools in the system itself would be nice.

I'll have to take a look at 13A... but I probably won't jump systems just now. We're doing the campaign for a podcast, and because 5E is the most popular/accessible system at present, I'd rather not confuse matters for the players or the audience by jumping systems (YET!)

It's my hope to eventually move into Starfinder and/or Pathfinder 2nd... but that will likely be next campaign.

As others have moreorless said, distances need to simplify to:

• engaged - in melee
• near - ≈30ft - namely within a Move
• far - beyond a Move

I wish every D&D spell had a range of either engaged (touch), near (upto 30ft), or far (upto 100ft).

When thinking about ranges and area-of-effects, just ballpark it as one of these three.

Yaarel said:

As others have moreorless said, distances need to simplify to:

• engaged - in melee
• near - ≈30ft - namely within a Move
• far - beyond a Move

I wish every D&D spell had a range of either engaged (touch), near (upto 30ft), or far (upto 100ft).

When thinking about ranges and area-of-effects, just ballpark it as one of these three.

Click to expand...

I like those range categories... but they run into problems when you get effects like "Distant Spell" involved... it basically makes one of the Sorcerer's core mechanics less useful, and I'd like to avoid that if at all possible. It's the same problem I have with non-grid movement; there are classes who have entire ability categories (Monk, Barbarian) based on speed and/or positioning. While these can be abstracted in TotM, they're less effective when the combat is being run through the filter of narration rather than being presented directly on a grid map for the players in question to ponder over.

The Session Tapes said:

I like those range categories... but they run into problems when you get effects like "Distant Spell" involved... it basically makes one of the Sorcerer's core mechanics less useful, and I'd like to avoid that if at all possible. It's the same problem I have with non-grid movement; there are classes who have entire ability categories (Monk, Barbarian) based on speed and/or positioning. While these can be abstracted in TotM, they're less effective when the combat is being run through the filter of narration rather than being presented directly on a grid map for the players in question to ponder over.

Click to expand...

One good trick would be to allow monks and barbs to do athletic or acrobatics check as Bonus Action instead of Action while in combat (if you require Actions for those things at first. Might not be your case)

The Session Tapes said:

I like those range categories... but they run into problems when you get effects like "Distant Spell" involved... it basically makes one of the Sorcerer's core mechanics less useful, and I'd like to avoid that if at all possible. It's the same problem I have with non-grid movement; there are classes who have entire ability categories (Monk, Barbarian) based on speed and/or positioning. While these can be abstracted in TotM, they're less effective when the combat is being run through the filter of narration rather than being presented directly on a grid map for the players in question to ponder over.

Click to expand...

Movement isnt so much a problem. A character with heightened speed can ‘engage’ a target that is ‘far’. (The DM adjudicates plausibility for special circumstances.)

The feature, Distant Spell, is easy. If a spell requires ‘engage’, the Sorcerer can instead extend it to ‘near’. If a spell requires ‘near’, the Sorcerer can extend it to ‘far’.


I wrote that ‘far’ is upto 100, but I meant upto 1000 feet, thus within an arrow shot.

engaged - melee
near - 30 ft within a move
far - 1000 ft within an arrow shot



Remote spells beyond 1000 are more like a ritual, rarely happen in combat, and combat rules dont really need to worry about them. Note that ‘line of sight’ is sometimes a special category that can potentially reach the horizon − or a star!

The Session Tapes said:

Hi folks,

Recently started a new D&D5E campaign, and we're just getting to the point where combat is imminent.

Now I've run plenty of combat in 5E before, but I always use battlemaps or dungeon tiles and markers. This time, as I'm trying to run a more free-flow, narrative campaign, I was thinking of leaving off the battlemaps and sticking to narrative (read: "Theatre of the Mind") combat.

Unfortunately, my experience with TotM in 5E has been really negative thus-far... the system just seems overwhelmingly optimised for map-and-marker combat, at the expense of a lot of built-in tools for TotM. I'm going to try an persevere with using TotM for the more spontaneous action sequences and only using maps for the big set-piece "Marvel Battles", but I was curious if there are other DMs out there who have the same issues using TotM in 5E.

The biggest issue I see with TotM in 5E is that it puts all the stress for managing and directing the flow of the action on the DM. I think this strips a lot of agency from the players, and can leave the DM with all the blame if the fight "goes south".

What, as a DM, are your experiences with narrative combat in 5th? Are there any special tools or systems you use to make it more accessible for your players?

Click to expand...

I think it’s wise to divide the combat encounters between big set pieces and minor skirmishes. Because by doing that, you can spend your prep time designing your set piece encounters while leaving “trash” combat encounters (random encounters, unexpected fights, etc.) to a very quick and improv-friendly rules set.

If I were in your shoes and table-time was at a premium, I would run my minor skirmishes narratively. (I can’t emphasize enough how important [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] ‘s advice is, so definitely keep a “Go back to 1” post-it handy). Anyway for narrative skirmishes, I want to dispense with absolute positioning in favor of relative position. You see this is some of the rules sets mentioned up thread. For me, there are only two zones/areas I need and two I *might* need.

I need:
1.) the Melee. Everyone who’s in the melee can move around and hit anyone else in the melee. These combatants are all engaged, close, whatever you want to say. They’re in melee.
2.) at Range. Everyone not in the melee is at Range. When you’re at range, you can shoot spells or missiles into the melee or at anyone else at range.

I might need:
3.) Above - aka “the dogfight” for aerial combats or higher platforms.
4.) Below - aka “the pitfight” for submerged or lower platforms.

That covers basically every range/area I need for a quick and dirty narrative combat.

Special considerations:
•Anyone can move into or within the melee freely, but anyone leaving it must Disengage (takes an action).
•If a character is mounted or has extra movement speed, then they consider every other combatant in melee, even the ones at range.
•A combatant can “move to cover from range” or “move to cover from melee.” When they do, attacks against them from the other side of cover get disadvantage but attacks from the near side get advantage. It’s a trade-off. I like this rule but it’s not necessary.
•Area affect spells, grenades, etc target 1 ally for every 3 enemies. 2 allies for 6 enemies. Etc. I like this rule too but you can just as easily say “no friendly fire” or “screw it, AOE hits everyone.”
•A rogue-type can “move to sneak attack/flank” but when they do, they are automatically included as a bonus target in any area affect attacks that might happen that round.

So you have players say things like “I move into melee with the hobgoblins while taking cover from ranged and attack with my spear: a 17 to hit for 5 damage.”

Or “I move to sneak attack and stab the hobgoblin in the back with my short sword: 18 to hit for 16 damage!”

And you say things like, “the goblins at range aim their bows into the melee and fire black-tipped arrows. Many bounce harmlessly off your cover but one gets through at a 16, dealing 4 damage.” Followed by “As the goblins dart around the melee at range and pepper you with arrows, the hobgoblins move together as a phalanx, granting one another advantage on their attacks as they advance. What do you do?”

Anyway, if you stick to relative position, “good enough” targeting, have everyone remember if they’re in melee or at range, and hit that play loop hard, you’ll get through trash encounters quickly and funnly (which is surely a word).

iserith said:

I prefer maps and tokens and use Roll20 even for in-person games.

But one thing I learned about TotM is that the standard play loop is even more important and the DM is well-served by internalizing that process and using it. The standard play loop is (1) The DM describes the environment, (2) The players describe what they want to do, and (3) The DM narrates the results of the adventurers's actions.

The key thing here (and this applies to any game, not just TotM) is that this is a loop, meaning that after you've narrated the result of someone's action and their turn is over, start back at (1) The DM describes the environment. Many DMs just go "Okay, John, you're up next..." skipping over (1) and going straight to (2). By doing so, this opens up the floor to questions about who is standing where and what the current PC is in the position to do. A side conversation ensues between the DM and player that interrupts the flow of the game while everyone gets back on the same page. With a map and tokens (or minis), these questions are answered just by looking at the map. With TotM, we need the DM to serve that purpose.

So, after (3), go back to (1) and re-describe what's going on succinctly and with an eye toward positioning, plus anything that has changed since the last time you described the environment (e.g. "the orc next to Ragnar was slain..."), laying out the basic scope of options that present themselves to that character. Then proceed to ask that character's player "What do you do?" Get into the habit of following that play loop as an ingrained habit. This simple thing will clear up a lot of issues and is already built into the rules, no house rules or special techniques required. It's good to do this for those times when you are using a map, too.

Click to expand...

This is incredibly helpful, thank you.

EDIT: To add on to this, what I’ve found very helpful when running combat without visual aid is to present options and trade offs instead of distances. “You can reach the bugbear this turn if you Dash,” and “you could get to cover this turn, but the hobgoblin will try and attack you as you run past unless you Disengage,” rather than trying to describe “the bugbear is 45 feet in front of you, the hobgoblin is 15 feet to your right, and there’s some rubble 10 feet past him.”