some questions

[moritheil]

Thanks, jaelis.
A note: on the Character sheet question, what I really needed was- how it's done in real world: if someone fills up his sheet, does he get another?
You said: "Some people don't use a battlemat at all and just estimate position". How can you estimate the position, in detail?

Easy if you don't mind doing math on the fly. Suppose you establish in round 1 that X is 40' from Y, and Y is 20' from Z - then if you want to know if X can charge Z, you simply note that at most that's 60', so if X's speed is 30', he can do it.

When there is some difficult terrain or obstacles, the DM simply thinks about whether there is enough hindrance to perform a given action or not - often based on the most likely position of things.

No group I have *ever* gamed with estimated position. We all use battle mats and minatures or tokens. Me, I prefer the tokens...'cause they're practically free. (Minus printer ink, of course.)

Certainly a valid choice, though by way of contrast, my groups have almost never used exact positioning. I personally don't mind allowing anything that is plausible; I just note what actions are geometrically impossible.

 

[Nail]

Huh.

So you don't use a grid of any kind?

I've heard of this; but in all of my years of 3.xe gaming, I've never seen it. And hey => that's cool. Whatever floats yer boat, man.

 

[Darklone]

Usually when I do big battles, I either use a computer for the battlemap with all positions... or I draw a little sketch on a piece of paper. On that paper I track the movement of most PCs and the general area where the hostile groups or NPCs are.

Since we're pretty well used to most maneuvers that anyone uses and how to position yourself to counter them, we simply assume that the PCs do the best thing they can do...

...and the result is: We don't really need the battlemap anymore.

Example: Yesterday there's a small flat platform at the entrance of a monastery, that's situated at 600ft height in a wall of a vertical rockface (3000ft high). There's a small bridge leading to the platform and about 200 enemies crawl, fly and ride up to the PCs.

There are 12 PCs right now (some NPCed ones from an earlier campaign for a cameo appearance). The melee dudes block the bridge entrance, the 4 archer specialists rain death from the side of the platform and the spellcasters hang a little back and plaster the road up to the monastery.

Now I know how fast the enemies are, what they shoot back and when the first small groups reach the PCs and where (climbers, flyers or riders). The PCs who can get AoOs e.g. due to reach or Hold the Line will get those (if the NPCs don't use countertactics). The melee PCs at the bridge will use their typical tactics... no surprises what's going to happen there either.

So why should I use a battlegrid?

 

[Nail]

So why should I use a battlegrid?

Because in almost all cases, it reduces mistakes and misunderstandings on both sides of the the DM screen.

Fewer "misunderstandings" = More fun.

 

[MithrasRahl]

My DM bought a small blackboard (about the size of a wall painting) and then carved a grid onto it, each cube representing a 5x5 square. That way we can draw on with chalk, then erase with ease.

 

[Lord Slaw]

My DM bought a small blackboard (about the size of a wall painting) and then carved a grid onto it, each cube representing a 5x5 square. That way we can draw on with chalk, then erase with ease.

Huh. Aside from the godawful sound that the carving must have made, that sounds like a very good idea. I might try that.

 

[Infiniti2000]

So why should I use a battlegrid?

Well, no solution is perfect so it would be trivial to drum up an example that makes any system look bad. Your example does exactly that for battlemats and tact-tiles. I mean, really, did you think that a flat map would depict 600ft and 3000ft heights well, in addition to a horizontal battlefield? Is there really anything that handles extreme 3-D combat well?

If you always have such complicated 3-D combats, then more power to you, but I'd imagine that most people don't, especially at the lower levels (which obviously you are not running) and where likely a greater majority of gamers play.

 

[irdeggman]

So why should I use a battlegrid?

Because there are so many things that depend on "position" and "distance" that it is pretty much essential.

You need to keep track of "terrain" - because you can't charge through "hindering" terrain.

You need to keep track of how close characters are too each other (foes and allies) - becasue of area effect spells.

You need to keep track of the times that a 5 ft step is used to avoid an AoO (and to step back up to make a full attack).

Let's not forget the foreever present "everyone line up a nice straight line so I can use Lightning Bolt on you" scenario.

Just because PCs (players) know how to manipulate position to their best advantage doesn't mean much when with the bad guys.

Now in the scenario you gave that is not a typical D&D combat - it is much more on the mass combat side. D&D combat rules do not translate well for those situations. Not to mention that if a group of 12 PCs are facing off against 200 opponents - there should not be much of a challenge there. That is the opponents must be on the order of 10 levels (or so) below the PCs or else it is not anything close to a proper EL situation - even though it is definitely "epic" in its feel. So essentially the PCs will gain 0 xp for the encounter (that is for defeating the opponents) due to the sheer difference in levels.

 

[Nellisir]

Some people obviously think a grid is essential for 3e gaming. Some people obviously don't. I (almost) never used a battlemat (didn't own one) before 3e (and the college would've frowned on us carving up their chalkboards), and I (almost) always use one now. Because I don't have a chalkboard anymore. I can run a game with or without a grid. Doesn't bother me.

Now, can we get back on track?

 

[Nail]

Now, can we get back on track?

Sure!

What was that, again?