Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6600796" data-attributes="member: 97077">It depends on the tools you're using. I use Roll20, even in in-person games, and there is no appreciable time taken away from moving the action forward, unlike the Q&A that is so common with some groups. Setting up the map is done before the session and minis with attached macros are moved from layers with a click. Square counting shouldn't be occurring during a player's turn. Figuring out if you're in range of a target, bit of terrain, or the like should be figured out off-turn. It's players that disengage off-turn that are the problem with regard to time spent on such things. In my experience when they are shown how much the game experience improves when they don't do that, both in terms of content covered and how much faster their turn in the spotlight comes back around again, they're sold.In D&D 5e, things are handled in terms of feet. If the group cares to use the rules as written with regard to range, then a grid helps more than it hurts in my experience. Players can answer their own questions with regard to whether they're in range to attack and have their actions ready to go before their turn is up.Above, I showed a map where there is no combat (unless something changes). The map is helping with exploration, reinforcing the description the DM offers. It would not slow anything down. I take the same position with maps during even a simple combat that might otherwise be fine without it - it's the players slowing things down, not the map. Players can choose to plan off-turn rather than disengage. Players can choose to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good with regard to tactics. It's when they choose not to do those things that the game slows down.</blockquote>

Verification