Tell Me About Your Experiences with Theater of the Mind 5E

[sim-h]

I generally sketch out a map showing rough positions before kicking off. It gets scrawled upon extensively, and I continuously describe the positioning in each round, e.g. "OK so now the three of you are in a line up against the one velociraptor (V3) whilst over to the left the two others of you have three of the velociraptors on you. Player: "How far to the left are the other two?" Me: "Ermmm 20 feet. Or 25." Player "Can I dash over there and help them out?" Me "You'd have to disengage unless the velociraptor in front of you drops first. Oh, there is some difficult jungle terrain around...but the short way over to the other group is clear for you" etc. etc.

 

[Ancalagon]

Remember that some people have afantasia: they cannot form images in their mind. I had a player like that (at the time, the condition wasn't well known) and it was very frustrating running a game without a grid.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Why do you say that OA don't exist? I think I've always used OA in TotM. Even without tracking positions or distances exactly, it's trivial to know who is in melee range. In fact, OA are part of the "mandatory" core rules of 5e which do not assume miniatures.

Opportunity attacks only occur when you leave someone's reach, which is an obscure condition that is unlikely to show up in most combats. If both melee groups just run at each other, and the ranged people hang back, then nobody will be in a position where they would provoke an opportunity attack anyway.

Flanking is presented as an option rule with miniatures only, but it's not difficult to use it also in TotM.

It's somewhat more difficult than not using the rule, since now you need to describe those exact positions you see in your head, instead of just saying whether or not someone is within reach. I mean, that's the sort of information which is much more easily conveyed with miniatures.

Likewise, if everyone has a reason to care about being in the exact right position (because of flanking), then you're more likely to provoke an opportunity attack as you move into that position. It can get very complicated very quickly, as compared to melee people only moving close enough to attack and never having a reason to leave an enemy's reach.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

In my experience, with larger groups, Theater of the Mind can get a little chaotic. But really, in battle, that’s arguably more realistic. As long as the players are okay with things being a little fuzzy, everything runs just fine. When you get someone that’s more grid-based and tactical, there can be some rough edges where the two meet. But if there’s trust between the DM and the player, it runs smoothly, even then.

I find as long as I establish where everyone is at the start of the battle in relation to each other, that takes care of most of what people need to know.

As for opportunity attacks, those somehow come up fairly frequently, even with TotM.

 

[Blue]

Every DM I've played with in 5e has used grid and minis, I think because spells and reach are really set up to want them even if it's a variant rule. There are plenty of systems that handle TotM in all aspects, from other d20s like 13th Age to games like FATE.

Some tips. Some system use zones, which you can be as explicit or not about. Maybe outside the gates is one zone, the courtyard another, up on the left or right walls are each a zone. So you have rough groupings for spells and the like, as well as information about movement needed - within a zone you can likely maneuver how much you want with a normal move, while between zones can be further, or maybe your move is just enough to get from one zone to the other without really giving you the ability to get where you want in a zone (i.e. engage someone or get to a specific feature).

It could be as simple as "far" and "nearby", with the special case of "engaged" for when these is melee.

 

[robus]

Every DM I've played with in 5e has used grid and minis, I think because spells and reach are really set up to want them even if it's a variant rule. There are plenty of systems that handle TotM in all aspects, from other d20s like 13th Age to games like FATE.

Some tips. Some system use zones, which you can be as explicit or not about. Maybe outside the gates is one zone, the courtyard another, up on the left or right walls are each a zone. So you have rough groupings for spells and the like, as well as information about movement needed - within a zone you can likely maneuver how much you want with a normal move, while between zones can be further, or maybe your move is just enough to get from one zone to the other without really giving you the ability to get where you want in a zone (i.e. engage someone or get to a specific feature).

It could be as simple as "far" and "nearby", with the special case of "engaged" for when these is melee.

That's pretty much how the Roshambo approach handles it. And the areas of effect spells use the targeting rules found in the DMG. It's quite simple and effective and is at the appropriate level of detail for TotM IMHO.

 

[pogre]

I really, really enjoy miniatures and terrain. We don't use a grid, we use measuring tapes.

However, this summer I went on a fishing trip with my sons and a friend and his son. Every night after wading the streams and fishing we would grill up some dinner and sit down and play some D&D. It was all TotM and it was great overall! We only missed the minis and terrain on a couple of combats, but we got through those without an issue.

I don't mind TotM at all - I just love my stuff!

 

[Li Shenron]

Opportunity attacks only occur when you leave someone's reach, which is an obscure condition that is unlikely to show up in most combats. If both melee groups just run at each other, and the ranged people hang back, then nobody will be in a position where they would provoke an opportunity attack anyway.

Well at least my XP tells me that this doesn't depend on TotM vs battlegrid. If everyone plays like that, then OAs will be rare anyway.

But I have played TotM even in 3.0 and OAs still happen just the same if someone runs away from melee.

Perhaps the second most common case (running past front line enemies to attack someone in the back) is more dm-dependent in TotM but that doesn't mean OAs are less likely. Quite the contrary, when the purpose is clear, the DM is probably more tempted to fiat an OA in TotM, while on a battlegrid a player can escape the dm's fiat by finding a path that narrowly avoids reach.

 

[Blue]

That's pretty much how the Roshambo approach handles it. And the areas of effect spells use the targeting rules found in the DMG. It's quite simple and effective and is at the appropriate level of detail for TotM IMHO.

You mention AoE spells. I do like how 13th Age does it, where spells and target "Up to two nearby enemies" or "1d4+1 nearby allies". Perhaps a guideline to convert AoEs to that format would be useful.

I really need to pick up the Roshambo approach.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Well at least my XP tells me that this doesn't depend on TotM vs battlegrid. If everyone plays like that, then OAs will be rare anyway.

For me, I think it's the other way around. I use TotM because I expect everyone to act simply and directly, such that opportunity attacks will be rare. If I anticipate a complicated fight, with lots of people running back and forth, then I would be more inclined to draw the situation out on a grid.

The 3E-era rules for opportunity attacks, as well as the flanking rules, increase the likelihood that characters will want to do tricky things with maneuvering, rather than just stand there and swing at each other. Although there were definitely some 3E encounters that I ran TotM, I was much more inclined to use miniatures for medium-complexity fights in 3E, since the AoO and flanking rules made it more likely that the players would want to do a lot of maneuvering.