D&D (2024) Mind Style versus Grid Style: can core support both?

[MockingBird]

I've been using both, seems to work good in my experience. I really hope they continue this approach.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

I use theatre of the mind at my table (not exclusively) and I am very happy with the way 5th Edition has handled wording the rules in order to support both gridded play and theatre of the mind.

I hope they continue with this in the future.

 

[Campbell]

There is a massive difference between actively supporting Theater of the Mind and us just not really giving a damn about defined distances and ranges sometimes. If not giving a damn sometimes is the standard than every RPG ever made supports Theater of the Mind.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

I think 5th Edition actively supports Theatre of the Mind with careful wording of the rules that avoids interfering with gridded play.

I found the approach to be successful and I hope they continue in the future.

 

[Aldarc]

The biggest hurdle in my opinion is for those who play Theater of the Mind to get past the idea of needing precision. The precision you otherwise would get for playing with a grid.

Actual distances in TotM? Irrelevant. As the DM, you get to make up and narratively decide what the characters can see and do. Do they have light sources? If yes, then you have to arbitrarily determine where the monsters might be and which ones are in view... and should not once bother with the "ranges" of the light sources per the PHB. You know what those ranges are "supposed" to be-- torch throws weaker than hooded lantern throws weaker than bullseye lantern-- so just decide what can be seen.

Is a mage casting a ranged spell? Then as the DM you can and have to just arbitrarily decide how many creatures can get hit. You might have a visualization in your own theater of the mind of where the monsters are... but you won't have precise coordinates, neither in distance nor clumpage. So you just have to essentially make it up, while using a sense of logic and reason for yourself as to where they all might be.

Basically... if you wish to play Theater of the Mind, you should not try to play the board game without having the board. Just use reasonable determination and make calls that seem as likely as you can visualize, and leave the distance and positioning to those using the grid.

There are a number of other TTRPGs (e.g., Cypher System, Index Card RPG, etc.) that opt for more imprecise distances: i.e., close, near, far, distant, etc. I would personally be on board for a change like this to D&D.

 

[Charlaquin]

Totm involves a lot of description & abstraction with things sliding in & out of a quantum state of relevance & irrelevance as the action shifts. Tactical grid involves precision & requires a lot of rules that can't be easily abstracted like totm. You can simplify & abstract precision on the fly relying on that sort of quantum shift but not the other way around to add rules & precision.



A lot of 5e's "totm leaning" is probably more the result of incomplete areas in the rules and excessive reliance on "ask your gm" rather than a deliberate effort to support totm. If that were not the case there would be things like universal range increments as noted above rather than a bunch of (often) one off ranges that may as well be drone warfare given the various rules for movement. I think that a lot of "but totm" service often comes down to just trying to justify rules omissions that fall into areas that totm itself has as weaknesses. With the proliferation of vtt's & mobile computing devices (ie cell phones laptops tablets etc) grid combat is easier than ever.

Edit:lighting is not an insurmountable hurdle that requires obluviating darkness & other games have managed it. If a room is such & such size it needs x & y amount of light to be partially & fully lit. You can do that with a number of smaller lights adding to x&y or one bug one else you can only enjoy the area being partially lit close to or maybe in short range of light sources.

So, you’re correct that the extent of 5e’s TotM support is just omitting certain rules and leaving them up to the VM. As well as having few mechanics like forced movement that can be difficult to keep track of without a visual aid of some sort. But this absolutely was deliberate on the design team’s part. Heck, the very term “Theater of the Mind” as a description of gameplay without visual aid, while not coined by WotC, was certainly popularized during the D&D Next playtest. Don’t forget, 5e was an apology edition, and one of the popular criticisms of 4e was that a battle grid was pretty much required. One of the major goals of 5e, along with making the average combat time 10 minutes or less, was make TotM and grid play both viable options. YMMV on if they succeeded at either of those goals, but it was definitely their stated intent.

 

[Neonchameleon]

One of the major goals of 5e, along with making the average combat time 10 minutes or less, was make TotM and grid play both viable options. YMMV on if they succeeded at either of those goals, but it was definitely their stated intent.

The combat time is IME so far from having been achieved that I didn't even realise it was a goal and have long been calling 5e's slow combat the largest player-side issue*. The TOTM + grid? It's mediocre at both.

* Yes it's faster than either 3.x (counting buff time) or 4e but lacks their highs and reason to invest time

 

[Charlaquin]

Just include both, the number for grid and the name for mind.

Distances/Range example:

Distance​	Range​
Melee (adjacent)​	~ 5 feet​
Close (one turn move action)​	~ 30 feet​
Mid (2 turns dash action)​	~ 120 feet​
Long (one minute dash action)​	~ 600 feet​
Far (2+ minutes dash action)​	1000 feet +​

Firebal: 150ft (mid)
Longbow: 150ft/600ft (mid/long)

There are a number of other TTRPGs (e.g., Cypher System, Index Card RPG, etc.) that opt for more imprecise distances: i.e., close, near, far, distant, etc. I would personally be on board for a change like this to D&D.

Yeah, something like this would be my preference, although I’d break it down slightly differently.

Arm’s Reach: Close enough to hit with a melee weapon or unarmed strike (5’ or less). All ranged attacks are made at disadvantage.
Extended Reach: Close enough to hit with a polearm (or other weapon with the Reach property), but too far to hit with other melee weapons. Thrown weapon attacks can be made normally, but all other ranged attacks are made at disadvantage.
Nearby: Too far to hit with a melee weapon, but close enough to reach in one turn without dashing (within 30’ or less). Ranged attacks can be made normally.
Short Distance: Too far to reach in one turn, unless you dash (up to 60’ away). Thrown weapon attacks are made at disadvantage.
Long Distance: Too far to reach in one turn, even if you dash (greater than 60’ away). Thrown weapon attacks are impossible, all other ranged weapon attacks are made at disadvantage.

Candles and hooded lanterns with the hood lowered shed bright light within arms reach and dim light to an extended reach. Torches, lamps, and hooded lanterns with the hood up shed bright light nearby and dim light a short distance away. Bullseye Lanterns shed bright light a short distance away and dim light a long distance away, within a cone. Standard Darkvision extends a short distance, superior Darkvision extends a long distance.

 

[Charlaquin]

The combat time is IME so far from having been achieved that I didn't even realise it was a goal and have long been calling 5e's slow combat the largest player-side issue*. The TOTM + grid? It's mediocre at both.

* Yes it's faster than either 3.x (counting buff time) or 4e but lacks their highs and reason to invest time

The thing is, there are too many variables affecting how long combat takes to resolve that have nothing to do with the game’s design. However, from close analysis of the combat math, it is clear that a medium to hard encounter should take about 3 rounds. I think this is the result of that 10-minute combat goal. They probably estimated that a round of combat would take about 3-5 minutes on average and shot for 3 round combats to be the norm, figuring that would put them within acceptable tolerance of that goal.

 

[bert1001 fka bert1000]

There is a massive difference between actively supporting Theater of the Mind and us just not really giving a damn about defined distances and ranges sometimes. If not giving a damn sometimes is the standard than every RPG ever made supports Theater of the Mind.

Yes, I'd rather the question be not "support" which implies to me bear minimum, but rather can core 5e "enhance" or "enrich" both TotM and Grid play.