3e mapping... too much info for players?

[mikebr99]

Am I making too big a deal about this?

We are using Excel (w/ the boxes squared as the grid) to cut-and-paste the characters and monsters around etc. Anyway, the players get to spend all the time (while it isn't their turn) planning perfectly where to place fireballs, and cone spells to both miss the rest of the party and hit as many monsters as possible.

The more powerful the party, the more that I'm thinking that this is an unfair advantage. The actual character wouldn't have that much quiet time to plan his next actions.

Has anyone come up with some rulings (house or otherwise) to more represent the "chaos of war"?

 

[smetzger]

True, players have more time to decide actions then their characters. However, their characters are actually there and have a very clear idea of where everyone is.

The only thing I do is if a spellcaster casts an area effect spell that has an area that is right next to a square that a friendly occupies the spellcaster must make a spellcraft roll. DC 1 for every 5 ft from the center of effect. If the spellcaster fails the check his friendly is caught in the area of the spell.

 

[Henry]

I know the perfect way to simulate the chaos of war, but most of the role-playing purists are going to hang me:

Take away the grid. Move it back to the sand-table where it came from.

Game on a flat, open surface - any table will do - and use terrain features as needed. If nothing else, terrain can be simulated with a graphic program, a color printer, and some printer paper. Then, break out the flexible sewing or tailoring ruler, or a long string with one-inch gradations on it, and let it fly!

Now for the evil part. Don't let players measure distances before hand; even better, have then line up their POV with their miniature on the table BEFORE pointing their finger right where they plan to place the fireball.

Then, get out the flex-ruler, and find out where the **** really fell.

I guarantee, you will have players much more carefully planning where they lob those area of effect spells in the midst of close combat. You will also have ZERO questions about whether something is within a PC's line of sight or not. If the string or ruler crosses the obstacle in question, then the PC has no line of sight to her goal. If it avoids it, then she does.

SImple enough?

 

[WSmith]

Henry already said what I was going to say.

 

[ninthcouncil]

Losing the conveniences of the grid outweighs the obvious advantages of Henry's solution, I'd say. I think smetzger is more on the ball, and this is the sort of thing I've experienced from other DM's in the past. All good fun when your wizard is in the habit of dropping area affect spells on the edge of melee, and your front-line characters are already heavily wounded....

 

[Plane Sailing]

A short while ago in the campaign that I run, the Monk/Fighter leapt forward to engage the extra-tough fighter hobgoblins, and while delaying them with his combat reflexes and whirlwind attack shouted back to the mage "Now cone of cold us!" He was relying on his Evasion and high reflex save to keep himself damage free - and it worked... that time.

Doesn't really answer your question, but I wanted to share the story!

 

[Umbran]

Actually, there's a simple balance - remember that the enemy gets to use the same things the PCs do. So, an enemy spellcaster that can drop their spells in just the right spot to hurt the PCs but not his own troops is balance enough, IMHO

Or, alternatively, use a stopwatch - keep the grid and all, but don't allow the players so much actual time to think. Having only a minute or two to plan can go a long way in that respect.

 

[Squire James]

The easiest thing to do is to institute a "hands off the mat" or "eyes off the computer screen" rule when it's not their turn. Nothing really stops them from "mentally counting squares", but I figure the "real wizard" would be doing that anyway.

During their turn, I ask them to point to a spot when they cast the spell. If they start to count squares, point to the first spot they pointed at and ask him "Are you sure you want the spell there? The next place you point at will be where the spell goes off." Don't be nasty about it, just note that 6 seconds doesn't allow for much counting and measuring time.

 

[kengar]

The Chainmail wargame has a "no pre-measuring rule" iirc. I use something like that IMC so that the player can be mentally counting squares and such but there's a "no tap back" rule when it's their turn and they move their PC's mini/cast their spell/shoot their bow, etc.

 

[Mark]

I fall in the middle, here, but feel that Umbran, James and kenger come closest to my thoughts.

Any judgement call a DM makes can be leaning toward or away from the characters, so why not lean for them? Honestly, when you consider that a person of (maybe) above average intelligence is trying to play a character who is likely a genius it is kinda hard to penalize them too much, eh?

I let them mentally count squares (no measuring or using the grid, which isn't really there, afterall) between initiatives but if they balk when it becomes their turn I enforce the "pick a square now or lose your initiative" rule. The NPCs (me) get the same treatment so it does maintain balance.

As long as the encounters are still challenging, there's no harm in the players using their brains to the best affect, IMO. Far worse to have players who zone out between the times when the spotlight is on them, AFAIAC...