I don't mean difficulty with changing the rules to not have to use the grid. Rather, I mean difficulty no longer using the grid, even when playing an edition where it is (largely) unnecessary.
Today, I ran a "New Year, Old School" one shot using the 1981 Moldvay Basic Set. During play, we used a standard 1-inch square Chessex battle grid. My intention was simply to have something to look at. In the end, though, I found that we used the grid too much, that we restricted ourselves and our play to the grid.
Some background: the players included myself and two players from my regular PF dungeon crawl game (plus my son, but as he's new, it doesn't seem relevant). I myself grew up with BECM and never used a grid until 3E, and hardly remember ever using even a sketch of the battlefield. For most of my gaming life, it was all mind space and imagination.
But since 3E appeared, any time I have played D&D, it has included a battle board -- sometimes more precise than others, but more or less always there. (There was a brief period where we played at Yale and used blackboards, which was quite freeing.) I am afraid that I have "forgotten" how to play D&D without some visual battle field reference, when I never even considered one for years.
To give specifics: there was one room in the dungeon with 12 skeletal guards, which would be awakened by either direct attack or touching the treasure vault door. In my mind's eye, I imagined a fast moving battle with characters constantly maneuvering between skeletal soldiers, drawing them into the cleric's "line of fire" for Turning and the like. What occurred (and, admittedly, it was near the end of a 4 hour session, so folks were starting to fatigue a little) was two PCs bottlenecking the door and a series of traded blows until all the skeletons were killed. I didn't even realize we had "Pathfinderized" the battlemat until afterward.
So, is it possible to "go home again"? Is there a balance between square by square control and imagination driven narrative? Have too many years of relying on minis and battlemats ruined my freeform DMing style?
Today, I ran a "New Year, Old School" one shot using the 1981 Moldvay Basic Set. During play, we used a standard 1-inch square Chessex battle grid. My intention was simply to have something to look at. In the end, though, I found that we used the grid too much, that we restricted ourselves and our play to the grid.
Some background: the players included myself and two players from my regular PF dungeon crawl game (plus my son, but as he's new, it doesn't seem relevant). I myself grew up with BECM and never used a grid until 3E, and hardly remember ever using even a sketch of the battlefield. For most of my gaming life, it was all mind space and imagination.
But since 3E appeared, any time I have played D&D, it has included a battle board -- sometimes more precise than others, but more or less always there. (There was a brief period where we played at Yale and used blackboards, which was quite freeing.) I am afraid that I have "forgotten" how to play D&D without some visual battle field reference, when I never even considered one for years.
To give specifics: there was one room in the dungeon with 12 skeletal guards, which would be awakened by either direct attack or touching the treasure vault door. In my mind's eye, I imagined a fast moving battle with characters constantly maneuvering between skeletal soldiers, drawing them into the cleric's "line of fire" for Turning and the like. What occurred (and, admittedly, it was near the end of a 4 hour session, so folks were starting to fatigue a little) was two PCs bottlenecking the door and a series of traded blows until all the skeletons were killed. I didn't even realize we had "Pathfinderized" the battlemat until afterward.
So, is it possible to "go home again"? Is there a balance between square by square control and imagination driven narrative? Have too many years of relying on minis and battlemats ruined my freeform DMing style?
