Difficulty Eliminating the Grid

[Rune]

While I believe that mapless combat can be a lot more fluid and dynamic, you gotta have the right system to allow it to be fluid and dynamic. And D&D, especially 3,5 and 4E is not that system. Too much range, areas of effect, and in 4E pushing, pulling, shifting, teleporting and the like for going gridless.

I frequently run 4e without a grid (or even minis). This does require a few things:

• The combats are usually quick skirmishes. For more complex combats, I have no compunctions about laying out the minis (although I generally prefer a cloth measuring tape to using a grid). Simple combats are possible in 4e. Minions, especially, are a good tool to use (but not exclusively).
• I do not require combat for advancement in my games. I do not specifically discourage combat, but I don't reward XP for it. Instead, the PCs level through major and minor quests completed. This helps me to set up those simple skirmishes because I don't have to worry about providing an average of 10 level-appropriate challenges to advance them. It also helps the truly challenging encounters stand out.
• I keep a mental image of what the combat looks like round to round (just like the good ol' days) and I describe it as precisely as possible. If any discrepancies arise, I clarify with the players (again, just like the good ol' days).
• I remain reasonable, but, in the end--in the rare instances where my interpretation disagrees with a player's, even after attempts to clarify our positions--my interpretation stands. This is an important one, but, really, never comes up, because...
• The players have to be on board. I have definitely run 4e for players who would not be down with any of the above. But, if the players are on board, yes, playing 4e without a grid is certainly possible.

 

[Schmoe]

Ha. That was exactly the situation in this battle. The dwarf even "tagged out" with the other dwarf when the first one took a bad hit while the thief kept pelting the things with arrows (side note: B/X skeletons do not have any special resistance to non-bludgeoning attacks).

In retrospect -- now that it has been a day and I am no longer hyper-critiquing the game, as I am wont to do right afterward -- it went well enough. I think my real problem with it was that only 2 of the 3 players really got to do anything in that battle (until the dwarves tagged out), except player 3 rolled initiative for the PC side.

Out of curiosity, I just ordered Castles and Crusades -- my curiosity finally got the better of me, with a little help from New Years libations -- and I was wondering where it sits on the grid<-->no grid scale.

Just to put it out there, if bottle-necking is a "bad" tactic that is only enabled by using a grid, it's a good thing the Spartans had a DM that used a grid.

At any rate, I don't think a grid is a bad thing at all, as long as it doesn't become a straight-jacket. Even the old BECMI modules recommend that DM's use miniatures and a battle-grid to help represent the flow of combat.

It seems that your primary concern is that some of the players weren't able to do anything in the battle. For a situation where several players aren't able contribute anything meaningful with their PCs, you can keep them involved in other ways. Have one player take on the rolls for the skeletons. Ask another player to track time. Basically, find ways that the other players can help make the combat run more smoothly even if they can't participate directly. There are certainly other situations where one or more PCs might need to "sit out" for any number of reasons, so I try to get the players involved in other ways. I certainly don't want to punish effective use of tactics, and bottle-necking is undoubtedly effective.

 

[Mark CMG]

Another way to get folks to not think in terms of "the grid" it to play away from a table, just lounging around on couches or outdoors (weather permitting) with just character sheets, maybe some notes and charts in a binder for the GM, and no surface where the grid might be missed.

 

[Thotas]

Even back in 1e, my groups have always used a grid. But before 3e, the idea that you took up exactly 1 square and it was "on" the square were alien. You plonked your mini on the mat, anywhere, the line between two squares, at the intersection, it didn't matter. If it was iffy as to whether you were in an area of effect or not, making the call was what a DM is for ... or to give a bonus on the saving throw if that seemed more appropriate.

As much as I really like 3.x/Pathfinder over other editions, this is one thing I do miss about the old ways of doing things. Sometimes the "pixellated battlefield" makes me a bit sad.