Combat Grid

[Zulgyan]

Are you using it for your True20 Games?

[DnDChick]

I will be. I find that a grid used with miniatures helps keep things straight as to where everyone is in relation to everyone else.

[Nikdo]

I generally like to use some form of map for combat situations just to have a general idea of where everyone is and to keep track of all the GM characters. I also have a large collection of miniatures that I like to use. However, I often feel like I'm playing a twisted form of chess when playing D&D with a square grid. I'll probably just use a plain, ungridded "battle map" for True20 so the players don't switch into an overly tactical D&D mindset. We'll stick to D&D for that type of combat. I prefer to keep True20 more open ended and narrative. I'll also use the recommendation made in the Feng Shui RPG of only giving a very rough drawing of the area so it's easier to adapt it to the needs of the narrative. This is probably going to make at least one of my players freak out but it really is a style that I prefer and that goes well with the narrative focus of True20.


--Nikdo

[timemrick]

I find that a grid used with miniatures helps keep things straight as to where everyone is in relation to everyone else.

Exactly! For this reason, I tend to use miniatures and a battlemat regardless of the game I'm running. (Squares if d20/True20, hexes for most other games.) If the system is less picky about exact distances (as in BESM), then I'm less picky about it on the map.

In the Blue Rose one-shot I ran last weekend, we used minis and a grid, but I never needed to draw anything on the map--I just pointed out where one or two things were while arranging the minis for the fight. The rest of the time, the minis were just used for a rough idea of marching order.

[DnDChick]

That, and I also have meta-gamers who *will* use vague information to their best advantage, and will always have their characters miraculously appear right where they need to be, or will challenge my every word on the positions of enemies and whether or not their character can attack them.

A battle map alleviates 90% of that.

And I do have some die-hard minis fans and some very good painters in the group. They like minis. So do I, even if I don't have the time or talent to paint them myself.

[Warbringer]

No, but minis are used to approximate. Keeps the game flowing

[reverend keith]

That, and I also have meta-gamers who *will* use vague information to their best advantage, and will always have their characters miraculously appear right where they need to be, or will challenge my every word on the positions of enemies and whether or not their character can attack them.

A battle map alleviates 90% of that.

True, however I'm in a very different situation with my current group. No one in my group matches that battle-map meta-gamer description, and most of the combats in my games have either been massive battles with armies, duels, or assassination attempts. The frequency of these events aren't that common, and the diplomatic/political struggle that the PCs are involved only spills into combat in very unexpected events. Probably the biggest common factor of these combats is the random and chaotic nature of the environment the PCs are fighting in. That, and the die-rolling/positioning portion of our combats are pretty much over before we have the chance to pull out figures. As such, I've yet to run into a situation where my game would be enhanced by sticking to a battle map, and so I haven't had the need to dust it off.

Now that I've said that, the situation that the PCs in my game are in is rapidly changing. They are going to more "traditional" D&D combat situations in future sessions, so plenty of chance for the players to pick their favorite minis.

[Nikdo]

True, however I'm in a very different situation with my current group. No one in my group matches that battle-map meta-gamer description, and most of the combats in my games have either been massive battles with armies, duels, or assassination attempts. The frequency of these events aren't that common, and the diplomatic/political struggle that the PCs are involved only spills into combat in very unexpected events. Probably the biggest common factor of these combats is the random and chaotic nature of the environment the PCs are fighting in. That, and the die-rolling/positioning portion of our combats are pretty much over before we have the chance to pull out figures. As such, I've yet to run into a situation where my game would be enhanced by sticking to a battle map, and so I haven't had the need to dust it off.

Oh what I would give to find a game like your's. Too bad I'm on the wrong coast


--Nikdo

[Stareyes]

I don't really even own minis, or a battle grid (unless you count the ones I got from the DMG and the Star Wars GM screen). I think normally we settle on my drawings -- 'here's the battle layout -- trees, bad guys, etc. Mark where you are' -- or dig out my friend's action figures -- 'Okay, Heather, your character is Miroku, and Jen's is Envy, and the bad guy is the figure missing half his limbs'.

[KyleC]

When running encounters indoors, I typically use a grid. However, large-area outdoor encounters I usually run gridless. I throw down model trees, buildings, and whatnot, then use a ruler for movement. One inch equals 5 feet, so one movement action moves a character 6 inches. Works well for me.

That way the entire table can be used as an encounter area.

-KyleC

[Citizen Arcane]

Having invested in a set of Tact-Tiles, I find that I always use a grid these days.

But having come from a Champions background, I'm very used to a grid, and find it to be a big help for visualization of small unit combats.[/url]