Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Azlan" data-source="post: 3437755" data-attributes="member: 2340">Would you be interested in a combat system for D&D that is a good compromise between the miniatures-based tactical-ness of D&D 3.5, and something that is totally abstract? That is, a compromise that incorporates most (if not all) of the detail and variety of D&D 3.5 combat, but does not require the use of miniatures (or cardboard counters in lieu of miniatures), as well as for a scaled map of the encounter area to be drawn out, each time. Of course, this compromise would have to streamline (i.e. simplify, in the process of making more abstract) many of the rules for movement, flanking, reach, ranged attacks, attacks of opportunity, etc.When I first started playing D&D, decades ago, my group at that time had neither the money nor the means to use miniatures, a re-usable "battle" mat, and eraseable markers. So, pretty much all the placement of the player characters and their opponents, in combat and on the encounter field, was kept track of within our heads. Occasionally, I (as the DM) would say, "Hmm, this is getting confusing. Here's what it looks like... ", and then I would illustrate the combat encounter, from an overhead view: first, drawing the area where it was taking place, on graph paper, and then marking where each and every player character and their opponents were. However, more times than not, one or more players would say, "That's not at all the way I was picturing it."Years later, when D&D 3.0/3.5 came along, as the combat system became more miniatures-centric, I began to realize how useful miniatures, a re-usable battle mat, and eraseable markers could be. (We still lacked the money for real miniatures, so instead we used cardboard counters, which served just as well.) Our interest in D&D was re-newed as we became engrossed in the implementation of the new edition's rules for movement, flanking, reach, ranged attacks, attacks of opportunity, etc.However, after having done this for a number of years, my players and myself are finding it tedious and time-consuming to keep using such a miniatures-centric combat system. Mind you, we still want to continue playing D&D, but we are growing tired of our roleplaying game getting bogged down into such a tactical, miniatures wargame, like we were playing Warhammer 40K or something.So, I'm wonding if there might be a good compromise? Problem is, I'm seeing that most other comparable RPG systems – GURPS, Hero, etc. – have gone the way of D&D 3.5. (Or is that the other way around?) Whatever, we don't want to stop playing D&D 3.5. (We really like the character races, classes, skills, feats, magic, world settings, etc., of D&D.) We just want a more abstract "encounter field" and "combatant placement/position tracking" system that retains all (or at least, most) of the combat detail and variety that D&D 3.5 affords us.</blockquote>

Verification