Pathfinder 1E Prepping for tactical combat in Sandpoint

[Vyvyan Basterd]

With a large-scale attack on Sandpoint looming, and a group that enjoys the tactical grid, I found myself contemplating how to best make it work.






The maps I created cover most of Sandpoint in a 25' per square scale. I'm still working out details of how to deal with the scale. I have another small mat that I might draw a 5x5 square surrounded by 5x5 squares to represent when a charcter enters the 25' square of another.

Anyone else try to run this combat or any other in a scale other than 5' squares?

 

[Cadence]

Very cool! I look forward to hearing how you decide to deal with the smaller scale and to hear how it works.

 

[doghead]

With a large-scale attack on Sandpoint looming, and a group that enjoys the tactical grid, I found myself contemplating how to best make it work.

<snip>

The maps I created cover most of Sandpoint in a 25' per square scale. I'm still working out details of how to deal with the scale. I have another small mat that I might draw a 5x5 square surrounded by 5x5 squares to represent when a charcter enters the 25' square of another.

Anyone else try to run this combat or any other in a scale other than 5' squares?

That's a pretty awesome map.

I don't use tactical maps, so can't really offer any advice based on experience. But your idea of stepping down to smaller 5x5 5ft square battle mats for action/combat within the larger squares makes sense. I expect the characters will be/get scattered around the map. So I would want to have quite a few of them to allow running several locations simultaneously. Perhaps photocopy or print out a whole bunch of them on paper and pencil in the specific location details as needed.

Once the characters exit the square, you probably want to keep the sheet in case they reenter the square, saving you the effort of re-drawing it. If you add a grid reference system to the main map, it would make it easier to keep track of the sheets. Alternatively, you could just number the sheets, and pencil in a number to the appropriate map square as required.

Good luck. Would love to hear how this goes.

thotd

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Once the characters exit the square, you probably want to keep the sheet in case they reenter the square, saving you the effort of re-drawing it.

I was thinking of simplifying when zooming into 5-foot squares and just use a blank 5x5. Obstacles, buildings, etc. would be dealt with at the higher scale. The exact positioning when zooming in is abstract anyway, the only real reason to zoom in to 5-foot squares is to allow grid-dependant things like flanking still occur. It should work out visually too, as there should be some space in most street areas and their opponents aren't going to wander into tighter areas because of their size. I'm not certain it will all work out and I'm sure things will come up in-game that we'll have to work out.

 

[N'raac]

Most characters move at 30', 20' or 15'. How do you plan on linking that with the 25' squares? There's no easy answer - once we move past 5' squares, some mechanism will be needed. Just curious on your plans in that regard.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Most characters move at 30', 20' or 15'. How do you plan on linking that with the 25' squares? There's no easy answer - once we move past 5' squares, some mechanism will be needed. Just curious on your plans in that regard.

Some of this will depend on the plans the party makes. They'll know the assault is coming and have plenty of time to prep. If they realistically want to be able to move across town they'll need something that ups their speed, like Fly. Or they'll be using the Run action much more than usual.

But if they do sit at a lower speed I was thinking something along the lines of carryover. Only move 20? You can't move this turn, but can add that unused 20 to your next turn.

I'm wondering if that will stagnate things and have thought about adding a caveat of moving at least one square with a move action as long as you have movement, with any additional coming off your next round. So, move 20? You move 1 square this round but only get 15 or your next move, etc. The only problem with this is that I feel it gets screwy with move, double move, run, etc.

 

[N'raac]

Some of this will depend on the plans the party makes. They'll know the assault is coming and have plenty of time to prep. If they realistically want to be able to move across town they'll need something that ups their speed, like Fly. Or they'll be using the Run action much more than usual.

But if they do sit at a lower speed I was thinking something along the lines of carryover. Only move 20? You can't move this turn, but can add that unused 20 to your next turn.

I'm wondering if that will stagnate things and have thought about adding a caveat of moving at least one square with a move action as long as you have movement, with any additional coming off your next round. So, move 20? You move 1 square this round but only get 15 or your next move, etc. The only problem with this is that I feel it gets screwy with move, double move, run, etc.

I think your approach is reasonable. If they haven't buffed their moves, then the turns should move pretty fast ("double move for 40'; I had 15' left over from last round, so I move 2 squares and have 5' into next round". As a simplifying assumption, maybe all diagonals are 35', instead of alternating 35'/40'. You can also count in 5' squares to get to the edge if they are in a tactical box at the start of the turn (eg. I swing on the last remaining opponent and hit, taking him down. I have a 30' move action left, so I move 5' to get to the edge of my 5x5 square map, then 25' through the next square on the big map, finishing with no movement left).

If some are in combat and others moving, it may drag a bit for the ones moving, but presumably that will even out over the course of the battle.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

After a D&D hiatus for RL issues and a fun Chicago Gameday, we were back to the action.

We went with carrying over any unspent movement to future rounds, which worked out well. And we only used the zoomed-in 5-foot scale when opposing forces shared a 25-foot square. With some placement assumptions when a creature entered the 25-foot square of another and some getting used to the scale-switch, it ran pretty smoothly.

The party consisted of a monk, bard, cleric/monk, and a fighter-type. Movement was slow across the center of town as the raid started. The monk zipped ahead a bit, but backed off as the player started to have the scale sink in and realized just how far ahead of the party (especially the cleric) he was.

They never engaged the giants that started the raid on the north gate, instead taking on the dire bears and giants crossing the bridge. The monk went down facing off against the bears, just before the raid leader and his entourage showed up to shout out his challenge to the town.

The party regrouped, healed the monk, and dimension doored across the mill pond to face the raid leader up close and personal. It was touch and go, with stones flying in from the bridge for an occasional hit, and the fighter-type finding it tough to stay conscious amid the onslaught of the raid leader. All while watching the skies as the red dragon ally of the giants smashed rooftops on its way to setting the old parts of the cathedral on fire. But they prevailed against the leader around round 16 or 17, sending the remaining giants in quick retreat.

The saddest part isn't even that only a quarter of the map was used, I'm used to that. It's that I have to clean the maps more this Friday's game.

 

[Kinak]

This is really cool! I ended up using 5' hex maps for a few encounter areas (where the bears were fording the river, the cathedral, and the docks where they caught up with the hostages) and just letting people know the number of rounds it took for movement between them.

Something similar to this might be interesting for the titular Fortress of the Stone Giants, but it depends a lot on how your players approach it. My players explored about a third of it on their way through, so I was glad I didn't do anything too elaborate.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[James Jacobs]

Wow... well done on going all-out for your players!

(APPLAUSE)