4E Battlemaps and semi realistic buildings?

[Cergorach]

Hi there,

4E encounters require more room (to stay interesting) then 3.5E encounters did, that's what I read on the web and in the DMG. What I see of the new adventures, this seems quite true. The guidelines I saw in the DMG aren't that great (very generic), does anyone have any guidelines to assist in making encounters (size of rooms)? From what I've seen from the adventures it's something along the lines of 7-10+ squares per medium combatant.

I've been working on plans for 4E 3D battlemaps, mostly working from the maps of the 3.5E adventure path "Rise of the Runelords" (by Paizo). The first couple of outdoor locations aren't a problem (no real battlemaps to begin with). The dungeons are also not really a problem, there's often enough room to expand a crowded location. But the problem starts with buildings, while it wouldn't be a real problem to make those larger, it does start to breakdown the 'realism' when I start making big@ss buildings that are unnaturally large just so they can host a few combats.

I'm tempted to keep the size of the buildings more or less the same, but making sure that the combat can spill out of it (to the outside or to other buildings). People jumping or being thrown through windows does create a certain flavor of roleplaying that I can appreciate ;-)

Or should I just throw out 'realism' out of the proverbial window and make buildings as large as they need to be to accommodate the encounter(s)?

Does anyone have any experience with this?

I intend to make 3D battlefields from things like HirstArts building blocks, foam, plastic, and carton. Not only do I find building things fun, but they will also be useful in my miniature wargaming endeavors.

 

[frankthedm]

Err on the side of larger than life. The hours it takes to make terrain are wasted if the mini's bases do not fit.

Now a way to do realistically cramped conditions is with removable interior walls that can be knocked down mid combat for more elbow room.

Also don't glue down piles of crates / stacks of barrels when making terrain. It looks great, but there will come a time when the option to remove them would have been useful. Small, unglued dowel pegs are far more useful for holding the terrain in place, while still having the option to clear more room.

 

[S'mon]

How about using a 2.5' per square scale for interior building floorplans? Real humans can fit in 2.5x2.5' after all. Just treat it in all ways as if the squares were regular 5' squares, so (eg) movement rate in squares remains unchanged - the rationale being that the cramped terrain hampers movement, everyone is 'squeezing' all the time.

 

[Zaukrie]

This is tough. I've run two different campaigns so far (about 4 sessions or maybe 5) and there are always too many creatures for the space. Heck, I ran an encounter where a villain kept sending his pets to the doorway, and the characters could not get into the room.

I need to re-examine this issue, as the PCs in front got to have a lot of fun, but the others didn't get to do much.

As for 3D terrain, I'd leave a little extra space around the walls. I personnally am building mine with an extra 1/4 inch or so in front of the walls, so there is room for minis.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

I'm tempted to keep the size of the buildings more or less the same, but making sure that the combat can spill out of it (to the outside or to other buildings). People jumping or being thrown through windows does create a certain flavor of roleplaying that I can appreciate ;-)

This is the approach I would go for. Allow for lots of movement between areas which are themselves realistically proportioned. Unrealistic maps are one of my pet peeves.

Throw people out windows, let powerful monsters smash holes in walls, make the battlefield interesting - multiple small rooms will be more interesting than one big open space.

This is tough. I've run two different campaigns so far (about 4 sessions or maybe 5) and there are always too many creatures for the space. Heck, I ran an encounter where a villain kept sending his pets to the doorway, and the characters could not get into the room.

The trick here is to anticipate this, and allow ways for the PC's to get around the bottleneck, or at least to allow some way for the front ranks to push their way into the room.

 

[Zaukrie]

I debated what to do, but there are times when the bad guys do deserve a chance to create a bottle neck, they aren't stupid, just working against the interests of the PCs.

It also isn't always practical. Even in rooms in "dungeons", there are only so many times you want stuff to spill over.

I can't remember, but I wonder how well the adventures in Dungeon are doing in creating space/room/routes for battles that allow 5 PCs and 5-10 bad guys to fight. I mean, if there is a bad guy and 5-8 minions, there isn't even room in most rooms for the PCs (let alone the bad guys themselves).

I've been noodling this for some time, actually.

 

[amysrevenge]

I debated what to do, but there are times when the bad guys do deserve a chance to create a bottle neck, they aren't stupid, just working against the interests of the PCs.

Heck, I've been in parties where we've done everything we could to arrange for bottlenecks of our own - a nice 10' hallway, with Swordmage and Battle Cleric in the front, ranger and warlock in the middle, and wizard in the back. Super easy for everyone to do their jobs unmolested.

 

[Krensky]

Well, this may not be directly helpful (not playing 4e so I'm may be missing some of the dynamics), but have you considered letting it stand? Open field combat, urban (or restricted in the case of a forest clearing or whatever), tunnel fighting, and CQB are all different things with their own rhythm, tactics, and skill sets.

 

[CharlesRyan]

I'm tempted to keep the size of the buildings more or less the same, but making sure that the combat can spill out of it (to the outside or to other buildings). People jumping or being thrown through windows does create a certain flavor of roleplaying that I can appreciate ;-)

Or should I just throw out 'realism' out of the proverbial window and make buildings as large as they need to be to accommodate the encounter(s)?

I would combine the two. Dynamic sets of interconnected spaces (including adjacent outdoors) are interesting. (Note how in Keep in the Shadowfell, the encounter areas weren't single rooms, but sets of connected rooms.)

As for realism, I also despise unrealistic maps. But look around your living room and try to imagine five guys and four monsters going at it in vicious hand-to-hand, sword-swinging combat. That's unrealistic--a 15 x 20 room is just too small for that sort of thing. If you want fights indoors, the spaces need to be big. (In this regard 4E might actually be more realistic than previous editions!) I just fudge the dimensions up a bit--as long as the layout is reasonable, that serves my need for map realism and allows me to ignore the fact that unless you're in a gymnasium, indoor combat between large groups is patently absurd.

 

[FATDRAGONGAMES]

I intend to make 3D battlefields from things like HirstArts building blocks, foam, plastic, and carton. Not only do I find building things fun, but they will also be useful in my miniature wargaming endeavors.

We will be launching our new series of 3D fantasy city terrain in about two weeks. PM me for details.