Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Terramotus" data-source="post: 4326299" data-attributes="member: 7220">So, I have a question for you - would using counters/markers instead of minis, and sketched out maps on a battlemat instead of any kind of printed maps help you out at all?&nbsp; I can understand wanting to imagine the creature in your mind instead of seeing the mini, but why does having a good idea of where the combatants are relative to each other kill the imagination?I remember many times in 2E, where we played without any sort of battle mat, having to draw out the battlefield on a piece of scrap paper because it was difficult to get across to the players what exactly the battlefield looked like through just description.Something similar to this often occurred:Player: Ok, so I climb on top of the leaning column and run across it to jump on the dragon.Me: That's a really long distance to be jumping...Player: I thought the broken column was leaning on the column near the dragon?Me: Yes, but the tall part is actually facing away from the dragon.&nbsp; The line of columns doesn't run that way.&nbsp; But there's that altar that's closer you could probably jump off.Player: Argh! I don't understand this temple at all!&nbsp; I thought the columns were perpendicular to the dragon!Me: They were until he charged Player2.&nbsp; Here, let me draw it out.But anyway, yeah, you could probably make it work without a map without too much trouble, as long as you were good with descriptions and kept a good idea in your head of what was going on.&nbsp; The way it's printed in the book makes it sound more complicated than it plays.&nbsp; I also agree that it's probably easier than 3E is to run without a map.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Terramotus, post: 4326299, member: 7220"] So, I have a question for you - would using counters/markers instead of minis, and sketched out maps on a battlemat instead of any kind of printed maps help you out at all? I can understand wanting to imagine the creature in your mind instead of seeing the mini, but why does having a good idea of where the combatants are relative to each other kill the imagination? I remember many times in 2E, where we played without any sort of battle mat, having to draw out the battlefield on a piece of scrap paper because it was difficult to get across to the players what exactly the battlefield looked like through just description. Something similar to this often occurred: Player: Ok, so I climb on top of the leaning column and run across it to jump on the dragon. Me: That's a really long distance to be jumping... Player: I thought the broken column was leaning on the column near the dragon? Me: Yes, but the tall part is actually facing away from the dragon. The line of columns doesn't run that way. But there's that altar that's closer you could probably jump off. Player: Argh! I don't understand this temple at all! I thought the columns were perpendicular to the dragon! Me: They were until he charged Player2. Here, let me draw it out. But anyway, yeah, you could probably make it work without a map without too much trouble, as long as you were good with descriptions and kept a good idea in your head of what was going on. The way it's printed in the book makes it sound more complicated than it plays. I also agree that it's probably easier than 3E is to run without a map. [/QUOTE]

Verification