Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Mapless tactical combat
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Asmor" data-source="post: 3265977" data-attributes="member: 1154"><p>One thing I've noticed tends to slow my games down is my reliance on miniatures and maps. There's no such thing as a perfect setup, and quite frankly I've just got too many other areas in my DMing which need work over and above my map preparation/improvisation techniques.</p><p></p><p>Unfortunately, D&D 3.5 has a very, very strong assumption that you're using a map with a grid of 5' squares. Flanking and attacks of opportuinity in particular are two rules which are vital to the balance of combat in D&D and are heavily reliant in most cases on the usage of a battle map.</p><p></p><p>Here's an idea I've been kicking around in my head for a long time, that I'd like to start fleshing out. Remove the map from battles entirely, and replace it with the concept of "zones." For the time being, we'll assume there's 3 zones in any fight; there's the common melee zone, the ally zone, and the enemy zone. The zones are arranged so that the melee zone is in the center of the ally and enemy zones. For the purposes of range for spells and ranged attacks, all units in the same zone are considered to be exactly 30 feet away. All units in adjacent zones are considered to be exactly 60 feet away. All units two zones away are considered to be 90 feet away.</p><p></p><p>Every time you make a move action, you can move one zone (so for example from the ally zone to the melee zone). If there are any enemies in your current zone, regardless of whether they're engaged or not, they get an attack of opportunity on you as if you had moved out of a threatened space.</p><p></p><p>If you are currently unengaged, you may choose to engage any unit (enemy or ally) in the same zone. If the unit you're engaging is engaged with anyone else, you become engaged with them as well. Essentially it's like a big ball of engaged people, and you can't just pick one out from them. We'll call this group an 'engagement'. Any specific person can only be in a single engagement. When engaging an engagement, you suffer all consequences of engaging each individual unit in that engagement as well.</p><p></p><p>When you engage a unit with longer reach than your own, you suffer an attack of opportunity.</p><p></p><p>All people in an engagement are considered in melee range of one another, and may attack one another. If a ranged attacker shoots into an engagement, he takes the normal penalties for firing into melee. If someone in an engagement is capable of threatening attacks of opportunity, he threatens all other people in the engagement.</p><p></p><p>If a group is outnumbered at least 2 to 1 in an engagement, all members of that group are considered flanked.</p><p></p><p>If you are in an engagement, you may take a move action to leave it. Doing so provokes an attack of opportunity from all enemies you're engaged with. You might then choose to join a different engagement in the same zone, take another move action to move a zone (provoking attacks of opportunity again for this moment as normal), or conceivably sit in that zone unengaged, for example if you wished to cast a spell without provoking attacks of opportunity.</p><p></p><p>Ranged attacks and spellcasting are basically unchanged. As mentioned before, units in an engagement are considered to be in melee and so ranged attacks take a -4 to hit. Since you are threatened when engaged, using ranged attacks or casting spells procokes attacks of opportunity as normal. You must engage a unit to touch them, such as when casting a healing spell.</p><p></p><p>Changed combat maneuvers:</p><p>*Withdraw: You may only withdraw when engaged; you become unengaged and return to your ally zone.</p><p>*Charge: Charging is now always a standard action. You must be unengaged to charge. When you charge, you enter the engagement of the target you're attacking, suffering all the effects of engaging them as normal.</p><p>*Bullrush: If you successfully bullrush a unit, the two of you leave your current engagement (provoking attacks of opportunity from others in that engagement) and form a new one together.</p><p></p><p>So that's my basic framework... It's far from complete, but I think it sounds reasonably workable. I invision using this with miniatures and three big squares for the zones. Just toss everyone's mini in the zone they're in, and group all the minis in a particular engagement together in a pile. Are there any other important rules I need to address?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Asmor, post: 3265977, member: 1154"] One thing I've noticed tends to slow my games down is my reliance on miniatures and maps. There's no such thing as a perfect setup, and quite frankly I've just got too many other areas in my DMing which need work over and above my map preparation/improvisation techniques. Unfortunately, D&D 3.5 has a very, very strong assumption that you're using a map with a grid of 5' squares. Flanking and attacks of opportuinity in particular are two rules which are vital to the balance of combat in D&D and are heavily reliant in most cases on the usage of a battle map. Here's an idea I've been kicking around in my head for a long time, that I'd like to start fleshing out. Remove the map from battles entirely, and replace it with the concept of "zones." For the time being, we'll assume there's 3 zones in any fight; there's the common melee zone, the ally zone, and the enemy zone. The zones are arranged so that the melee zone is in the center of the ally and enemy zones. For the purposes of range for spells and ranged attacks, all units in the same zone are considered to be exactly 30 feet away. All units in adjacent zones are considered to be exactly 60 feet away. All units two zones away are considered to be 90 feet away. Every time you make a move action, you can move one zone (so for example from the ally zone to the melee zone). If there are any enemies in your current zone, regardless of whether they're engaged or not, they get an attack of opportunity on you as if you had moved out of a threatened space. If you are currently unengaged, you may choose to engage any unit (enemy or ally) in the same zone. If the unit you're engaging is engaged with anyone else, you become engaged with them as well. Essentially it's like a big ball of engaged people, and you can't just pick one out from them. We'll call this group an 'engagement'. Any specific person can only be in a single engagement. When engaging an engagement, you suffer all consequences of engaging each individual unit in that engagement as well. When you engage a unit with longer reach than your own, you suffer an attack of opportunity. All people in an engagement are considered in melee range of one another, and may attack one another. If a ranged attacker shoots into an engagement, he takes the normal penalties for firing into melee. If someone in an engagement is capable of threatening attacks of opportunity, he threatens all other people in the engagement. If a group is outnumbered at least 2 to 1 in an engagement, all members of that group are considered flanked. If you are in an engagement, you may take a move action to leave it. Doing so provokes an attack of opportunity from all enemies you're engaged with. You might then choose to join a different engagement in the same zone, take another move action to move a zone (provoking attacks of opportunity again for this moment as normal), or conceivably sit in that zone unengaged, for example if you wished to cast a spell without provoking attacks of opportunity. Ranged attacks and spellcasting are basically unchanged. As mentioned before, units in an engagement are considered to be in melee and so ranged attacks take a -4 to hit. Since you are threatened when engaged, using ranged attacks or casting spells procokes attacks of opportunity as normal. You must engage a unit to touch them, such as when casting a healing spell. Changed combat maneuvers: *Withdraw: You may only withdraw when engaged; you become unengaged and return to your ally zone. *Charge: Charging is now always a standard action. You must be unengaged to charge. When you charge, you enter the engagement of the target you're attacking, suffering all the effects of engaging them as normal. *Bullrush: If you successfully bullrush a unit, the two of you leave your current engagement (provoking attacks of opportunity from others in that engagement) and form a new one together. So that's my basic framework... It's far from complete, but I think it sounds reasonably workable. I invision using this with miniatures and three big squares for the zones. Just toss everyone's mini in the zone they're in, and group all the minis in a particular engagement together in a pile. Are there any other important rules I need to address? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Mapless tactical combat
Top