Doing away with the battlemat

[Ibram]

I find that using a battle mat keeps the players and the DMs on the same battlefield. I experimented with getting rid of the grid system (replacing 5' with 1" move on a ruler) but it just slowed the game down.

 

[Narfellus]

battlemats

We learned long ago that 3e and 3.5 was just too tactic heavy for us. Combat CRAWLED to a slug-like pace, took hours to resolve, and wasn't fun. So we scaled down most of the AoO to work only under specific circumstances. But we still use the battlemat for drawing area of effects, rooms, to overlay with 0one Games prerendered maps, my own homemade rooms, etc etc. I even use the battlemat in CoC games for the occasional times when it helps to draw a symbol, or a room, or an artifact, or a cursed word from a cursed book. There's never a reason a roleplaying group WOULDN'T need a big vinyl thing to write stuff on, even if not delegating block by block combat.

 

[EricNoah]

I, on the other hand, love the tactics. I don't love boring combats that go "I swing, he swings, I swing". I love the fact that one person's actions might cause another person to move, seek cover, etc. There is a tradeoff -- combats can be longer -- but to me it's worth it.

 

[Voadam]

In reading the 1e feelings thread, I saw an interesting idea: give up the battlemat. It makes combat faster and more cinematic.

At first thought, my 3.x gorge began to rise. "But how will you do AoO then?". Then I began to smile. As a DM, there's nothing I hate more than deciding to have my villains run, only to be cut down by AoO. I'm sure they would cause some problems at first, but I think I've been brainwashed.

See, I loved 1e. Loved it. And I love 3.x. I really do, it's just that combat takes too f*(&(*g long most of the time, getting bogged down in "tactics".

My question is this:IF you have done away with the battlemat, does it seem to affect the game much, and is it a positive or negative change?

Running away still draws an AoO. Closing with someone with reach draws an AoO. Those are easy to keep track of without a mat as well. Similarly, getting up from prone after being knocked down. Attacking unarmed, initiating a grapple, sundering or disarming. None of these require a mat to be remembered.

Otherwise judgment call if someone wants to run to the back to hit a back liner they probably have to run past someone in-between and draw an AoO. Who and how many in this situation can get iffy though.

Its not that big a deal to keep AoOs in the game without a mat.

 

[Doctor Bomb]

I play both with and without the mat. ...for combats with many creatures, or that are otherwise tactically chalenging, the mat actually speeds things up.

I second that emotion, but it does depend a lot on the players. If you have a bunch of rules-lawyers playing fighter types or casters using area-effect spells, KEEP THE MAT. Detailed combat maneuvers and creature spacing are their bread and butter.

My players are usually a little weak on the rules side, so for the smaller combats, I describe where everyone is, and usually work in some hints to keep the action going. "The gnolls leap from the bushes about 20 feet from you, dropping their bows. As they draw their axes and shortswords, you notice that you could use your Cleave feat on the pair on the left, if you manage to fell one. Do you want to risk that Attack of Opportunity from the one that already has his axe out?"

With more experienced players, you probably don't need the hints, but letting them know before they act whether they will provoke an AoO and who is within a 5' step of threatening who in a melee really cuts down on confusion and speeds up the combats.

 

[Waylander the Slayer]

Use tact-tiles - so much better than battle mats
Battle mats slow things down but has the advantage of eliminating ambiguous situations and measuring range etc. It just comes down to preference.

 

[maddman75]

I tend to use the mat only for large, complicated, or important battles. If there's interesting terrain or its a large combat then things move faster with the mat than without it.

Here's how to keep things moving

1) Delegate. Pick a player to keep initiative for everyone. No reason the DM has to do it. If you have someone who has trouble focusing when it isn't their turn, this is a good job for them. Also, make your group's Rule Lawyer the official Rules Monkey. They'll keep the core books and any important suppliments close at hand to help look up and determine rules questions.

2) Limit player time. You got about six seconds to tell me what to do. You don't entirely lose your turn, I just go to the next person in initaitve and come back after that to see if they're ready.

3) Don't allow excessing counting. If your players are obsessively counting squares to get the maximum out of their movement or area effect spell, just tell this this is D&D, not chess, and move their freakin guy. Works for me. If need be, you could even go gridless on 'em. No grid, they have to point out the center of the AoE or where they want to move to, then measure out the exact effect. No pre-measuring!

Nothing wrong with losing the mat either, especially for small battles.

 

[kengar]

We tend to play tactic-heavy. We don't play d20 though, we use Savage Worlds (another fairly minis-dependent game). In a system like Savage Worlds or d20, the rules tend to favor using the grid because so many of the actions and effects, etc. count on know exactly where someone is. Back when we were playing 1e, we never used minis or the mat and it worked fine.

Personally, I like using minis and scenery, but am indifferent to the grid itself. We use it because we're used to it, and with the Chessex mat, it's so easy to quickly sketch out a room or scene. One day, I may drop it in favor of a wargame-style gridless board where distances are measured (after declaring) with a tape measure, and things like spell effects are checked by templates.