Is 4e do-able w/o minis?

[Azzemmell]

I've looked at 4e a little bit and I'm hesitant to switch from 3e. One of the main reasons (aside from wizards not having spells anymore) is that it seems even more entrenched in the mini and combat mat than 3e is. I've never liked having to rely on minis, I'd prefer being able to just describe a combat encounter.

So I'm wondering, how interwoven is the dependence on minis to the combat system? - from what I've seen it looks like they are almost inseparable.

 

[Nikosandros]

I've never tried it, but I've read of folks who do it and it works for them.

Personally, I think that without some sort of tactical map, 4e loses a lot of its best points. In other words, even if it's doable, I'd rather not. There are many other fine games that don't require minis at all.

 

[Jack99]

YMMV but those who have actually tried say it is possible. I do not recall an example where someone tried to run 4e without the grid and failed, but of course, I do not read every single post.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I run all minor combat without a grid (faster then having to set it all up). We basically divide a lot of the movement and distance stuff into; beside, near and far. So, it creates a loose mental map.

While it certainly isn't as tactfully precise, it is entirely doable.

 

[Khuxan]

The reports I read was that it was as minis-dependent as 3E. So if you can cope without miniatures in 3E, you can do so as well in 4E.

 

[Baumi]

I personally have no problems with maps, but still use it only if there is more than a handfull of enemies. Small battles are easily described an kept in the mind, also drawing the battlefield takes to much time for just a short fight.

But larger ones I usually use mini's, regarless of the system, simply because you can quickly come to some missunderstandings with your players and you have to keep to much in your mind. But if you have players who are good at picturing the battlefield and are selfreliable with the rules of their characters than you should have no problems playing without a map.

 

[Lord Xtheth]

Yep, sometimes I just get lazy and don't want to hunt down the right looking minis or draw up some lines on my photocopied grids from the DMG that I have in dry-erase safe sleeves.

I can cope without a map as a DM. My players however always seem to fall back to at least some kind of tactical layout, even if it doesn't have a grid, they just like seeing where things are on the battlefield.

In my 3.x games, I never once used minis. There were sometimes where I did draw up little battle maps, but nowhere near as often as it seems to be happening in 4th.

 

[ferratus]

Well, jeeze I can't be the only person who does minor encounters without breaking out the minis and the battlemat.

Largely it plays in feel much like second edition. The DM estimates how far away people are from the combat or who would be hit by a spell effect.

The best rule to consider is "combat advantage" for mini-less play, because the position of the mini is largely to show whether someone has combat advantage. If you are describing a cinematic scene, then the player can generally describe getting to a superior position.

The other reason to have minis in 4e is to decide where and who the area effect spells (blast and burst). This works exactly as it did in 2e as well, with a lot of DM fiat.

Finally, you have to worry about whether someone is adjacent. Largely it solves itself by people who engage the same enemy or describe themselves as coming to aid of an ally.

Otherwise it is mostly a matter of "strong attack", "medium attack" and "weak attack". Those are largely when the character wants to spend resources rather than something that is minis dependent.

So it is possible to do, but I would suggest using fewer enemies in play at once than you would use in a normal 4e game with minis. It can be hard to keep straight if you have 10 enemies on the board at once.

Also, I would cut the warlord class. The cleric grants buffs at range, but the warlord generally depends a lot more on the exact position and actions of his allies for the buffs and extra attacks he grants.

 

[vagabundo]

I run all minor combat without a grid (faster then having to set it all up). We basically divide a lot of the movement and distance stuff into; beside, near and far. So, it creates a loose mental map.

While it certainly isn't as tactfully precise, it is entirely doable.

This.

I've only just switched to mini-less minor battles. For the larger scale I'll keep tha battle mat. The group massacred the goblins in KotS without a single battlemat drawing.

 

[Imaro]

You know, I'm not going to claim it can't be done...but I'd really like one of the posters who has done this to go into a little depth. I mean every time I see this brought up, there are people who said they've done it but they never go into depth about how exactly they accomplished it, what does or doesn't work as far as playing 4e without tactical representation goes, etc.

The impression I mostly get when people say they've played without the grid is that it boiled down to handwaving alot of combat.