D&D 4E Why Keep a Grid? Measurement in 4E

[GoodKingJayIII]

With the elimination of 1-2-1 diagonal movement, it seems to me that direct measurement is a much better option than an actual square battlegrid. Say 1 square = 1 in. (or whatever). This probably opens up a whole can of worms I'm not considering. But with the reluctance to use a hex-based grid because of wall-clipping, why not just throw out the concern entirely?

In my 3e hayday, we were very fast and loose with the battlegrid. We used miniatures, but often never had grid and judged distance by eye. It wasn't perfect, but then we didn't care that much for tactical exactness. Diagonal movement was a non-issue, and of course our dungeons looked however the DM wanted.

Maybe dropping the grid brings the game too closely to its wargame roots (I'm thinking of Mordheim here, the one miniature skirmish game I've played with any consistency). Plus it brings up the whole issue of 3D terrain, which is not everyone's cup of tea.

With 4E's more precise emphasis on movement and positioning as viable combat tactics, it just seems to me that sticking with the square grid is confusing at best and a potential hindrance at worst.

Thoughts?

 

[fafhrd]

I come to the exact opposite conclusion. The grid doesn't allow for tactical fuzziness. You know exactly when you're flanking. You know precisely which routes across the battlefield will provoke. It's clear when you're in melee and when you're not. IME, this is the sort of certainty that tactically minded gamers tend to favor.

 

[Moochava]

Depending on how hard-wired "flanking" rules are, I'm considering doing away with the grid and just using straight distances. I'm not sure, though: having to adjudicate "Yeah, I think 6" means you can reach that orc" is just one more judgment call for me as a DM--and I estimate that I can only make about 100 judgment calls in a session before I want to take a nap.

I'm surprised WotC didn't go for it, actually: straight measurement not only removes the nerd rage of 1-1-1 movement, it allows them to sell magnificent custom rulers and circle-templates. Color-coded by power source! Don't forget to pick up the special elf-only ruler because elves have a higher movement rate!

D&D the ruler! D&D the the t-shirt, D&D the coloring book, D&D the lunchbox, D&D the breakfast cereal, D&D the flamethrower!

 

[Valdrax]

With the elimination of 1-2-1 diagonal movement, it seems to me that direct measurement is a much better option than an actual square battlegrid. Say 1 square = 1 in. (or whatever). This probably opens up a whole can of worms I'm not considering. But with the reluctance to use a hex-based grid because of wall-clipping, why not just throw out the concern entirely?

Have you ever played console tactical RPGs, like the Nippon Ichi series of games? (Disgaea, Phantom Brave, Makai Kingdom, etc.)

Earlier games in the series use a tactical grid. Some later games chuck out the grid entirely for free-form movement. Personally, I find those later games to be much more "fiddly" to play. It's harder to anticipate whether or not you can move your units just out of range of enemies, and it take longer to futz around with positioning of your units to catch the right number of enemies in an area of effect attack (like a cone-shaped sword slash).

Plus, real life makes cones and bursts even harder to work with unless you make physical measuring tools for them. I'd just advise against it if you wanted to have rules for flanking, reach, and area of effect spells in a game. Might as well go entirely battle mat free rather than risk the bickering over exact distances on a gridless mat.

 

[Spinachcat]

The 1-2-1 diagonal nonsense was such an arse pain. There was always one or two people at the table who could never manage to count it out - especially after 10pm and two beers. The 1-1-1 movement is a perfect solution. Our group plays lots of wargames and boardgames and almost every ruleset allows 1-1-1 diagonal movement.

AOOs (or now OAs) are the reason for the grid vs. just using freeform minis and rulers. I run Warhammer, OD&D and Savage Worlds and other RPGs with minis and terrain but no grid and there is no problem. We don't even measure out with rulers because eyeballing it does the job just fine.

However, AOOs/OAs require more exactness to determine if someone did something adjacent to you and that's where you need the grid. Otherwise, its most fiat.

Personally, I think Savage Worlds did it right. If you wanted to take AOOs/OAs, then you took a feat that let you attack people who came into melee range. Otherwise, you didn't care about them.

 

[zen_hydra]

Without a grid of some sort how would one track the path (and expenditure) of movement? How do you measure the movement of someone running in an "S" pattern? I think it would end up arbitrary, or way too complicated.

 

[frankthedm]

Without a grid of some sort how would one track the path (and expenditure) of movement? How do you measure the movement of someone running in an "S" pattern? I think it would end up arbitrary, or way too complicated.

Tape measures flex and few times do folks run in S-patterns in my experience.

 

[Kordeth]

Without a grid of some sort how would one track the path (and expenditure) of movement? How do you measure the movement of someone running in an "S" pattern? I think it would end up arbitrary, or way too complicated.

You measure yourself out a 6" length of string (or 5" or 7" or whatever your speed is). If you can put one end at your starting space and one end at your destination, you can move that far, no matter how squiggly the string. That part's easy, it's adjudicating things like threatened area, flanking, and power areas of effect that gets tricky.

 

[frankthedm]

Flanking is easy, measure from center to center to center like the 3.0 chainmail minis.

 

[Asmor]

D&D the ruler! D&D the the t-shirt, D&D the coloring book, D&D the lunchbox, D&D the breakfast cereal, D&D the flamethrower!

How about D&D: The Yogurt?

One of the things that's always bugged the hell out of me when I was trying to get into Warhammer is that you're not allowed to measure until you commit to an action... so if you're 6 1/32 inches away, and only have 6 inches of movement, you're boned.

Of course, on the other hand, allowing measurement might slow the game to a crawl...

The only minis game I ever played were Mage Knight and MechWarrior, and I thought they had a very elegant solution: If it was possible, you just made it clear to your opponent what your intention was. For example, "it's my intention that this unit it facing so that your healer is on the very edge of its firing arc" or "it's my intention that I'm just outside of the range of your attack." Allowed you to play the game's corner cases and push the free-form movement to the edge without having to worry about nudging or making misaligning and screwing up your whole plan because you set the guy down rotated a half degree clockwise.