"Theater of the Mind" or Map and Minis?

[Tony Vargas]

It's funny, but one of my issues with strictly map and minis play is that GMs often shy away from or even shut down cool ideas because they don't want to have to deal with representing it. Anything with a 3d component, even as simple as someone standing under someone else on a balcony is likely to illicit groans from the GM and/or other players

3d on a grid is pretty easy - note elevation, and you have a functional Cartesian coordinate system. Floating moats in the elemental chaos moving randomly at the bottom of every round? No sweat!

Of course it helps to keep use of the grid simple - it'd've been tricky to plot a 3.5 fireball template into the above combat, for instance.

Long-range combat suffers too IME, with the vast majority of fights starting at similar ranges. It is much more rare IME in a game that uses at least some Totm, for these things to be discouraged. .

Long range combat can be problematic for some parties, anyway (leave too many PCs out, be too deadly or a cakewalk if only one side has stand-off capability and can kite...) But, if not, you can always just put an area so many squares off the map and count it down as movement closes the gap. Even if it's own separate little map, you could say the intervening distance is a TotM component though...
That's the thing, you can always use /some/ TotM - the map can be one area of focus - a ship, a section of city wall the party is defending, a pocket dimension, a region of breathable air under water - and it can be moving or have things going on around it at various distances tmbetond the edges that don't get mapped...

TotM is always available when you reach the limit of your visual aids, just like you can get out and walk if you run out of gas. Doesnt mean you always should.

 

[happyhermit]

3d on a grid is pretty easy - note elevation, and you have a functional Cartesian coordinate system. ...

I'm not saying it isn't entirely doable, we use all sorts of methods, Alea tools are pretty cool. What I'm saying is even something as simple as one person on a balcony, another person underneath them, ends up being much less common in mini's and mat only games. I don't think I have ever seen a GM running Totm so much as bat an eye over things like this, but I have seen many using minis discourage it in subtle and not so subtle ways. Same with the other issues you mentioned, sure you can do a combination of some Totm in a primarily mini's combat, etc. We did that a lot. We have been heavily into minis for ages, I love them (even painting), but shifting away from them has been very positive for us to the point where they get used very little. We still pull them out on occasion, but it is for nostalgia and toy factor as well as the different type of tactical experience.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm not saying it isn't entirely doable, we use all sorts of methods, Alea tools are pretty cool. What I'm saying is even something as simple as one person on a balcony, another person underneath them

Y'know those clear little plastic boxes dice sets come in. Put one over the ground level character, the flier or balcony guy atop it.

ends up being much less common in mini's and mat only games. I don't think I have ever seen a GM running Totm so much as bat an eye over things like this, but I have seen many using minis discourage it in subtle and not so subtle ways

Choosing a tool that does many things well, simply, and with reliable precision and persistence might discourage you from doing something it handles no better than not using any tool at all, so it's better to never use any tool?

No.

Just use the right tool for the job, including no tool in those instances where there's no other option available.

 

[happyhermit]

Y'know those clear little plastic boxes dice sets come in. Put one over the ground level character, the flier or balcony guy atop it.

What about my posts makes you think I need help running a game with mini's? I didn't say anything about having difficulties running such games myself, if it's the "IME" that through you off I was referring to games I have played in or observed.

Choosing a tool that does many things well, simply, and with reliable precision and persistence might discourage you from doing something it handles no better than not using any tool at all, so it's better to never use any tool?

No.

Just use the right tool for the job, including no tool in those instances where there's no other option available.

Wow, nothing like being told "You're doing it wrong!" by a stranger on the internet. There is no "right tool for the job" in an objective sense, it depends on the people involved, the type of game, etc. And what I have found these days is that more often than not, IME, Totm is the "right tool for the job", even when we have stacks and stacks of tools available collecting dust.

TotM is always available when you reach the limit of your visual aids, just like you can get out and walk if you run out of gas. Doesnt mean you always should.

And when you walk you can use a walker, much safer that way. Doesn't mean you always should.

 

[Usus]

I play ToM almost exclusively. Back when my group played D&D 4th we used minis and grid maps, but it was always time consuming and made combat take longer time.

I can recognize the appeal of setting up terrain and minis - but once we begin playing it looses its appeal for me. It is not flexible and shifts the focus to tactical maneuvering (counting squares etc), where as Theater of Mind allows my groups a lot more dramatic combat.

So my preference is for ToM, and luckily the same in general applies to my fellow players.
There, however, a few cases, where I might use minis. If I get a Spelljammer game up and running again, combat between the 'jammers might perhaps be done with minis.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I was referring to games I have played in or observed.
....
Wow, nothing like being told "You're doing it wrong!" by a stranger on the internet. .

Exactly like that: its what you were doing, asserting that using a grid cuts off a variety of scenarios and that averythings so wonderful now that youre using totm.

Of course, each technique works more comfortably with some scenarios or details than others, and if you get into a rut, you can just shy away from switching techniques and even from those less comfortable scenarios. So you might avoid larger battlefields & long range engagements of all you have is a smaller map, or gravitate to single-monster battles if TotM has become a habit, or whatever. Even though there are ways to cope with either.

 

[Imaculata]

I play 3.5, which lends itself perhaps more towards grids and miniatures. But I use both. Theater of the mind for simple skirmishes, and dungeon tiles or maps with a grid, with miniatures, for large scale battles.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

Honestly I myself am surprised to see so much support for TotM. My own personal feeling is that D&D doesn't really feel like it's designed for it. The game 13th Age has a system to determine how close or far away combatants are in TotM, but D&D5E specifies distances in feet, has spells with varied AoEs, rules for flanking and opportunity attacks, etc.

I enjoy tactical combats, thinking of them as puzzles to be solved. Not having a representation of the battlefield and its combatants makes me feel like I'm not fully in control of my character. Whether my character's abilities are effective or not is up to DM fiat rather than an objective rule set.

Also, from a purely subjective standpoint, I enjoy forcing movement on the grid. My current character is a Battle Master Fighter/Hexblade Warlock with Maneuvering Strike (which lets an ally move half their speed), Lightning Lure (which pulls a target to you), and Repelling Blast (which pushes a target away). There's just something I find personally satisfying about being able to force an enemy to reposition.

 

[happyhermit]

Exactly like that: its what you were doing, asserting that using a grid cuts off a variety of scenarios and that averythings so wonderful now that youre using totm.

No. I was responding to someone's post about their experience and opinion with my own experience, because I find it interesting that we were finding the similar things in opposite techniques. I wasn't telling them they should use Totm because it's the right tool for the job or for any other reason. I wasn't implying that they just didn't know how to run Totm well enough. They weren't doing that either.

Of course, each technique works more comfortably with some scenarios or details than others, and if you get into a rut, you can just shy away from switching techniques and even from those less comfortable scenarios. So you might avoid larger battlefields & long range engagements of all you have is a smaller map, or gravitate to single-monster battles if TotM has become a habit, or whatever. Even though there are ways to cope with either.

Sure, for myself though, when running I find more and more that the things I used to pull minis out for are going over better in Totm. Anyone can say; "You just aren't good enough, try harder. You will see how much better they are for those situations" but I've seen a LOT of GMs run with mini's so if there are some tricks that will radically swing this around they are well hidden. Not to mention I actually have a lot of other issues with minis, but I never brought them up because I don't think the intention of this thread was to be some debate over which is better, or to dump on a style you don't favour.

 

[happyhermit]

Honestly I myself am surprised to see so much support for TotM. My own personal feeling is that D&D doesn't really feel like it's designed for it. The game 13th Age has a system to determine how close or far away combatants are in TotM, but D&D5E specifies distances in feet, has spells with varied AoEs, rules for flanking and opportunity attacks, etc.
...

For me personally and many I play with, lack of specific measurements and the more abstract system in 13th Age ended up more or less a deal breaker on it's own. It was not what we expected because we have had good success with similar systems in other types of games like Fate, but for the types of games we want to run in D&Dish systems, it didn't work. We tried something similar in 5e, where we had the measurements to work with, and it was better but contrary to a lot of what I hear online, we still preferred having the more granular system as a starting point. I thought it might be due to the fact that many people I play with seem to have a better grasp of distances than most thanks to their jobs and backgrounds, but since 5e I have seen so many new-to-ttrpg players that don't have very similar backgrounds and it still seems to work very well.