Fiddly Bits: Feet of Movement

MarkB said:
I hate to say it, but this is starting to look more like a difficulty that you, personally, have with mentally envisioning distances than any general "theatre of the mind" playstyle issue.

Looking over the thread, it doesn't look at all like I'm a unique individual in wanting to nuke fiddly distance measurements from orbit in my games. And it directly relates to "theater of the mind" combat because in a more abstract combat system, you can ignore fiddly distance measurements. In fact, that is part of the POINT of them.

However, in 5e as it stands right now, you can't. Checking out some of the folks who have good ideas or who support my own call for this (and googling around for similar systems), it's not something that I am some sort of alien brain slug about. This isn't a unique one-off circumstance. Entire game systems enjoyed by more than one person (*cough*FATE*cough*) have been built with this kind of battle in mind.

So while it ain't universal, it ain't just me.

If that's the case, then whilst it would certainly be appropriate to formulate some useful set of house rules (such as Stormonu suggested), it doesn't seem like this is an issue the official game rules need to address.

I am not sure that in a modular 5e, that WotC would be very smart to tell someone who wanted to play different to go screw like that.

I also think it's good for newbs, and for a low barrier to entry for the game. 5e right now kind of requires the minis-and-a-grid element, and that's not something that Little Timmy who is opening 5e's PHB for his birthday is going to necessarily have. I think the game needs to be complete without those accoutrements.

Involve, clearly. Require (unless you want to personally redesign the thing), nope.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The OP is absolutely right that absolute measurements like "feet" or "squares" have no place in a theater-of-the-mind system.

The problem is that D&D has never been a theater-of-the-mind system. Not really. It has always been either a miniatures game with ruler measurements (early D&D used measurement in inches after all), or a grid-based system. Theater-of-the-mind in D&D has always been either a houserule, or a sloppy alternative rule suggestion.

The old Red Box made a really big deal out of the fact that it didn't include a board, because the action took place in the imagination.

Likewise, 2nd Edition made no assumption of the use of miniatures or a battlegrid, right up until the release of "Combat & Tactics", which came late in the edition.

They may not have been very good implementations of theatre of the mind, but it's hard to argue that that was not the intent.

D&D may have come out of wargames, but it had already moved quite far from those roots even by 1st Edition. 2nd Ed took it further away. In that regard, 3e was a step back towards the wargame roots, 3.5e another step in that direction, and 4e a step further still.
 
Last edited:

One of the neat things I've noticed is Wizards is really trying to make every single ability non-spatially dependent. AoOs and Reach (which was dropped) meant needing to know spatial configuration.

Now we simply have a condition tracking like "in melee with" and "within normal range / far range" etc. Distance is irrelevant. Everything can be kept as a condition on a sheet with no grid necessary.

However, I am still baffled how Theatre of the Mind incorporates Move or Speed without tracking distances. Anyone care to help?
 

So while it ain't universal, it ain't just me.

Hey, try adding an extra layer of metric conversion on top of the mental gymnastics: Feet? Smorgblargh? GARG!

I will, though, generally do fine if it's standardized. So if the numbers are always the same (5 feet, 10 feet, 25 feet, 50 feet) I can easily grid that in my brain (in reach, just out of reach, a round away, way over there).
 

I think specific distances are a necessity, because the game has acquired a tactical facet that it cannot let go of. Having said that, the tactical part of the game is (and should be) optional, and it would be nice to let go of specific measures if you are not using it.

To be honest, I feel more strongly about doing this with money than with distances. I'd love to just have some categories of wealth, and handwaive what a character can afford. This would make "dragon scale" clearly the equipment of a very wealthy adventurer, or someone of an appropriate background.

But I digress. Yes, making range categories instead of actual measurements would make the game less fiddly for me. I would absolutely expect to see the tactical rules place distances with specificity.
 

However, I am still baffled how Theatre of the Mind incorporates Move or Speed without tracking distances. Anyone care to help?

In my experience, Theater of the Mind handles speed and movement by ignoring it until differences in speed or movement matter. In the last playtest I ran, hobgoblins had laid down a field of caltrops forcing the PCs who wished to enter melee with the hobgoblins to choose between making the Dex save against the caltrops or not reaching the hobgoblin line until the second round of movement. The exact distance didn't matter. All that mattered was that you couldn't reach the hobgoblin line in one turn without risking damage from the caltrops.

In my experience, this speeds things up since the DM can simply describe the tactical choice. On a battlemap, I would have had to figure out the correct distance to set up the choice properly, and then the players would have had to measure the distance and perform the analysis themselves. Just telling them (A) or (B) makes it easier. There is no reason to worry about the exact distance until someone says that they have a 30-foot jump spell and wants to know if it would work. (Then, the DM proceeds with a "say 'yes' or 'yes but'" philosophy.)

-KS
 

[MENTION=97068]Kamakazie[/MENTION]_Midget, usually, you are very eloquent about how you'd like to see things done when you feel WotC missed the boat. Can you express what you'd like to see for a movement TotM module, especially how you would handle charge, bull rush/push, flanking, are of effect spells and "reach" weapons?
 
Last edited:

While it would probably be helpful to add ToTM nomenclature to spells/movement/ranges etc... removing all mention of feet from everything except in the tactical module would then require every spell/movement speed/range etc... to be duplicated in that module to add the distance in. Probably the better option would be a side bar listing various distances/speeds and a correlation to close/near/far and slow/normal/fast.
 

3.X notes spells as short-medium-long most of the time and adds in a number that is easy to ignore. I just kind of know what short/medium/long are. Would be nice if they just gave some guidelines as to that in the general magic rules and just notated spells in that one-word fashion. Other things too.

Something like "seeing the white of their eyes", "hearing insults shouted at each other", and "discerning rude gestures"? ^^
 

Here's a completely untested, basically stream of consciousness idea of how to set up a theatre of the mind system that still uses D&D's stats and core system.

The battlefield is divided into zones, a la FATE. Each zone represents a sizeable portion of a battlefield, and most skirmishes take place on battlefields with at least three (and potentially many more) zones. Under normal circumstances crossing from one zone to an adjacent one simply takes a move action.

Within each zone, you may move around, attack, and so on freely. If you have allies in your zone, you may target them with beneficial effects and include them in your auras, etc. If there are enemies in the same zone as you, you are either engaged or disengaged with them.

If you are engaged with an enemy you are in melee combat with them. They can attack you, you can attack them.

If somebody is in your zone but the two of you aren't engaged, then you are disengaged. You can't attack them in melee combat (yet). You can target each other with ranged attacks, including thrown weapons and short range weapons like darts and slings (though penalties may apply if somebody else is engaged with you at the same time).

You engage with someone by spending a move action to do so. If you try to engage a new target while already engaged elsewhere, you provoke opportunity attacks. You can spend a move action to leave your current melee combat, becoming disengaged from everyone.

Thus anyone in your zone is only ever a move action away, although you risk serious injury if you ignore the enemies in front of you to chase off after another one.

You may only use long range attacks (bows, crossbows, many spells) to target enemies in another zone. Each zone further away the enemy is, you suffer the penalty for a range increment. If you want to close with an enemy in a distant zone, you need only cross into it from your current location, which takes a move action each time you want to leave your current zone to enter an adjacent one.

In zones with rough terrain, you must spend an additional move action to become engaged or cross a zone boundary. Some zone boundaries might also require ability checks or other extra steps to successfully cross. Failing such checks might incur special consequences.

When you cross into a new zone, you aren't engaged with anyone. You may move to engage a new target in this new zone as normal, and following the rules for engagement and disengagement above.

Finally, pushes and other movement effects are handled a little more abstractly. Any push is able to force the enemy it targets out of engagement with one character. For instance, if you have a melee attack that pushes someone X feet, any enemy you hit with it is forced to the "disengaged" state with you. It will take them another move action the next turn to move back to engage you.

You can also use forced movement to push an enemy into another zone.Typically this means that you roll an opposed Strength check, though other abilities may be more appropriate depending on the particular circumstances. The person initiating the forced movement gains a bonus on this opposed check equal to the number of feet they are pushing the opponent. The defender may gain advantage if the situation calls for it, such as their having exceptional stability (a behir with its many legs) or the zone boundary being particularly strong (trying to push an enemy uphill into a tangle of brambles).


Whew! That was a lot more typing than I thought it would be. I wonder if it actually makes any sense! Though now that I wrote it (stealing very generously from FATE, of course) I'm curious to give it a try myself.
 

Remove ads

Top