Post/Author/DateTime	Post
blue m@ge 1.0 08-23-05, 05:16 PM	I'm a newer D&D player and I've heard D&D can be played without a bourd and miniatures if so how, this style of play sounds like it could save me alot of money and preperation time.
Centauri 08-23-05, 05:26 PM	I'm a newer D&D player and I've heard D&D can be played without a bourd and miniatures if so how, this style of play sounds like it could save me alot of money and preperation time. You can try to just keep track of things in your head. Or draw little diagrams. Or use other objects in place of miniatures.
mathogre 08-23-05, 05:28 PM	I'm a newer D&D player and I've heard D&D can be played without a bourd and miniatures if so how, this style of play sounds like it could save me alot of money and preperation time. Regarding the miniatures, you could probably use lots of things for character markers, as long as you can distinguish them. That *could* save you some money. Regarding a board or grid map, I'm not sure that would be so easy. You need to be able to somehow know where things are - buildings, doors, PCs, NPCs. A plastic grid sheet seems pretty economical to me; buy it once and you're done. I don't know how not using a grid map or miniatures would save you preparation time.
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-23-05, 05:31 PM	Can and IMO should. Just ditch AoOs for movement.
StormKnight 08-23-05, 05:36 PM	Boards and minis are a convenience to help give a visual idea of what a battle looks like and make a more "tactical" game. If you don't want them, don't use them! Just narrate and imagine the action! You'll need to do more work on descriptions to make sure people know where things are. You'll also need to be comfortable improvising things like when attacks of opportunity take place. This is generally really quite easy - for a rough rule, if someone is going to fight the closest foe or just trying to get out of a fight, they probably don't take an AoO. If they want to go 'around' someone, or maneuver into a flanking position, or something fancy like that, they probably do. If you want to go halfway, you can always minis without grids to just show roughly where characters are. Don't worry about exactly how far apart models are or anything like that - just use them to show how the wolf is closer than the wizard, and the rogue is off to one side. Stuff like that.
Jagyr Ebonwood 08-23-05, 05:43 PM	A pad of graph paper and a box of freshly sharpened pencils...mm, mmm, old school.
rogueattorney 08-23-05, 05:54 PM	I'm a newer D&D player and I've heard D&D can be played without a bourd and miniatures if so how, this style of play sounds like it could save me alot of money and preperation time. From 1974 to 2003 these items were considered optional. That WotC has altered the rules to the extent that a newer player doesn't even know how to play without them is... Eh, I'm just not going to go there. Like others have mentioned, use a piece of paper and a pencil. R.A.
Lord_Butler 08-23-05, 06:29 PM	This game can most definately be played without minis and board. The first few years I played it was with a map drawn on grid paper and the PC's initials used to mark their location. The only reason we didn't use minis was because we lived in rural alabama and there weren't even any hobby shops in nearby cities. It worked fine, and from what I remember the games then were much more fun than the ones I later played with minis on a chessboard.
Nomad4life 08-23-05, 06:34 PM	My advice; ask your group of players what they’re interested in. If your group is more “wargamey” they might enjoy breaking out the rulers and pieces and such, and trying to play the AoO rules in their favor. If your group is more plot/character/story oriented, the minis & board aren’t really necessary... At all. They will only slow the game down. Sure, they help some players kill things faster, but it’s just not worth it in the end if it’s not what you’re into.
Tuah Shinguru 08-23-05, 06:38 PM	As said before, you could. It makes it a lot more fun when playing with miniatures though, because otherwise you might as well just be sitting around asking yes or no questions. :P
Aliquid 08-23-05, 07:14 PM	As said before, you could. It makes it a lot more fun when playing with miniatures though, because otherwise you might as well just be sitting around asking yes or no questions. :PClearly you didn't play D&D before version 3.0 came out :P I've been playing D&D for over 20 years, and it's only in the last 4 years that I have ever used minis during a game. If you don't want to buy minis, but still want the visual representation, use anything else. Cut out small pieces of paper, and write the players name on it. Use other small objects (e.g. Bob is the d6, John is the penny, Jane is the quarter, and the monster is the bottle-cap) Or just use a pencil and a pad of graph paper.
Kem 08-23-05, 07:23 PM	I've tended to use minis iwhile playing D&D since I started playing. When I was 4ish in 1984 :)
jim9311 08-23-05, 07:38 PM	as stated, anything can act as markers for characters and opponents. We have used dice, coins, and even minis. We bought a starter set of minis and just use them for everything. one character had some Star Wars minis. Chewbacca the wookie is our parties number one enemy. He has been everything from a hobgoblin shaman to a vampire. We have used everything from dominoes to toothpicks to show the size and shape of walls. a laminated piece of 1" grid graph paper can be reused with a china marker. and we have a used battle mat that we got for 15$US. As to some of your cost concerns: we just all pitch in on the cost of new books, minis, or whatever we get. Of course, being 36 and playing since 79-80, we 1. have a lot of stuff already, and 2. have a little more purchasing power than some younger gamers. I've seen folks pay 50 bucks for a PlayStation game and then 20-25 bucks for the book of tips and another 10 for the magazine with all the cheats in it and then gripe at the cost of D&D gear, so its a matter of what you want to do with your entertainment money.
Tuah Shinguru 08-23-05, 07:38 PM	Clearly you didn't play D&D before version 3.0 came out :P I've been playing D&D for over 20 years, and it's only in the last 4 years that I have ever used minis during a game. If you don't want to buy minis, but still want the visual representation, use anything else. Cut out small pieces of paper, and write the players name on it. Use other small objects (e.g. Bob is the d6, John is the penny, Jane is the quarter, and the monster is the bottle-cap) Or just use a pencil and a pad of graph paper. No I didn't! :D I probably wouldn't care for it if it had been shown to me then; that's why I ended up not liking RPG maker 2 very well.
Molimo 08-23-05, 07:44 PM	From 1974 to 2003 these items were considered optional. That WotC has altered the rules to the extent that a newer player doesn't even know how to play without them is... Eh, I'm just not going to go there. My playgroup is about as new as possible and we never use miniatures or a board. In a battle with one or two monsters we'll just keep track of things in our head; with more than that we break out the graph paper and pencils.
Sinaz 08-23-05, 08:14 PM	for a while, my group was playing using just miniatures. It worked out really well because there was more freedom in movement... we just consiered the platform a 5ft. diameter circle, and would guestimate everything. If movement came too close to call, you had to make a REF check DC10 or we'd 'round down' to one square shy... this was used because we constiantly came to situation where it looked like a character could just barely get to within striking distance in a round and we didn't feel like busting out rulers. With that in mind, this could be accomplished using coins as markers. In fact, most of our creatures were pennies and quarters. Then, when you get the dough, do like I did and get an Alienware Area 51 laptop, a high-power digital projector, and some laser pointers for your gamers... aim the projector at the wall, make maps in Photoshop, and miniatures from the stock artwork on the WotC site and go completely digital! ;)
Clarissa804 08-23-05, 08:44 PM	Thank you for the thread, I have been playing for 25 years, and until last night, never played on a board or with info cards. We have always used the character sheets, and full sets of dice. we used the maps from the campaign books, and graph paper when we had to map out the dungeon or a particular building. It may sound kind of funny to some of the players from the new generation when you go through a room and count "10 feet, 20 feet, at the 30 foot mark, you see a wall to the north, and opening to the west."..... Last night was the first time EVER I played on a Crystal Castle cloth board with the minis and cards. And I don;t like using "averages" for damage, in my opinion it takes away from the fun of watching 1d12 + 3d6 + 3d10 + bonuses or whatever roll on the table, and you got some good damage results. one more thought: graph paper laminated with clear contact paper works well for making cheap maps. then use markers to make your maps, you can wipe them off when you are done and reuse the map paper. Just my opinion. I'm one of the "ancients". Hey, I'm learning, and still having fun...... use whatever works for you. xo Clarissa804 "A day is a lost day when you don't learn something new..."
phishhead1991 08-23-05, 08:50 PM	forget about saving money think about saving stress, it is true you can play without minitures but spend the 19.95 on the battle map it makes everything alot easier.
StormCrow42 08-23-05, 09:20 PM	As posted above, it is possible to play without minis and a game mat. The DMG came with a reasonably large game grid, you could use that with counters or tokens for not too much money. The things I find you may miss when just describing the action without a map: Flanking (gimps rogues and anyone who wants the bonus to hit) Accurate ranges (harder to get ranged combat or shorter ranged spells right) Cover/soft cover (especially soft cover provided by your own party or for monsters in the back) Area of effect spells/splash weapons Reach weapons Attacks of opportunity
Majorafire77 08-23-05, 09:24 PM	I'm a newer D&D player and I've heard D&D can be played without a bourd and miniatures if so how, this style of play sounds like it could save me alot of money and preperation time. Do you have a chessboard? Works perfectly for my group
Serielle 08-23-05, 11:15 PM	Honestly, I never even considered that D&D required mini's before coming on the boards. I was a bit baffled as to why people consider them neccesary, but at any rate I've never DMed with them. There are a few times that I have placed coins or whatnot to keep tack of where everything is when my party has gone up against hordes of baddies, but otherwise I keep everything in my head and draw it on a peice of paper if a player requests it. I used to run combat somewhat freeform, sometimes taking initiative as a suggestion rather than a strict order in which everyone acts in. It worked fine for my old party, most of them didn't know the rules anyway and this way was just a lot less of a headache. The only things we really did keep track of were attack roles, saving throws and damage. Everything else- movement, AoO's, flanking, area effects, etc were freeformed. I did play a few sessions with my girlfriend where we kept rigious track of where everyone was in relation to each other, and by God, it was the most excuriatingly boring thing I've ever experienced. Halfway through the session I had my character sneak past everything I could, and simply avoided rooms where there was baddies simply because I didn't want to get into any more combat. Anyway (God I'm long winded), my point is that combat can be as loose as you want it to be, and you most certainly don't need minis. You can treat the entire combat mechanics as a suggestion if you want, though I'm sure that if you spent money on the books, it certainly wasn't for the high quality fluff.
DarkSoldier 08-24-05, 12:19 AM	You can play without minis and maps, but adjucating area effects gets quite difficult.
Tyler Do'Urden 08-24-05, 04:18 AM	Hell, if you're really good, you don't even need the rulebooks. Or character sheets or pencils. Or other players. Yes sir. I can play D&D just sitting around thinking.
Wraithburn 08-24-05, 04:29 AM	My group is using a battle mat, with a glass coffee table insert over top. I then just draw on the glass insert with a Sharpie ( Bless there ever useful souls) to represent ealls and doors and whatnot. As for creature/character representation...we use...bread bag clips. The first couple of years that I played D&D was with 2e...we didnt use anything to represent positions or characters. I must tell you, using a battle mat and little "figures" is ALOT more satisfying. You do miss out on quite alot by not using a grid and figures...but D&D is still more than functional even without. Wraithburn.
Morfeen 08-24-05, 06:50 AM	From 1974 to 2003 these items were considered optional. That WotC has altered the rules to the extent that a newer player doesn't even know how to play without them is... Eh, I'm just not going to go there. Like others have mentioned, use a piece of paper and a pencil. R.A. Damn right!! paper and pencils.......and a set of dice shared between the players. How we used to do it in the 80s. Brings back alot of memories! Beautiful thing about D&D is that it has always been about imagination. No winners! No losers! Everyone enjoyed it coz the real pleasure came from the journey and the growth. Nothing is really set in stone where rules are concerened and like what many have said you can always improvise as long as everyone agrees. Morf
Sir Knight 08-24-05, 07:27 AM	You can certainly play without, though I suggest you use them. Even the DMG comes with a grid map that you can use (get it laminated though if possible). Use the DMG map and some coins, tokens, paper, whatever. Minis use opens a new yet related hobby that many enjoy. We prefer metal minis for our heroes and we paint them (LOTS of fun) and as a DM I like getting the WotC D&D minis for monsters as they are prepainted and cheap to buy singles. When I started with 1st Ed use of minis varied between group and group (ratio of 25% minis, 75% no minis). Sometimes if we had them we would use them to represent the combat or situation but usually we just used our imaginations. With 2nd Ed we moved into more of a tactical game and I would say minis use went from 25/75 to 50/50 in the mid 90s to 75/25 in the late 90s. With 3rd Ed we moved pretty much to 100% minis (actually we had near the end of 2nd Ed as well). Now after a few years of constant mini usage, I am going to slowly wean off them and only use them in combat that justifies them. We'll see how it goes.
Quarterstaff 08-24-05, 03:39 PM	Alright neither are needed period. The group i play with didnt use a grid ever. And we didnt start using miniatures until one year ago. Assuming the DM and players are not idiots you can just say what the distance's are. You dont have to use anything but a half-intelligent Dm who can narrate and keep things straight. We use a white board and dry-erase markers and it works just fine.
IceFractal 08-24-05, 05:02 PM	I've played just fine with minis but no grid, you just have to be good at estimating differences. A grid certainly speeds things up though, as you don't have to measure distances or ask the DM whether you can move to a particular spot. Neither item has to cost anything, you can print a grid out off your computer, and you can use anything for minis. I use dice for the monsters and random toys/actual minis/other stuff for the players, and it works fine. Even if you don't have things of the right size, a small figure can emulate a large monster if you put it on a grid intersection - which is another advantage of using a grid. I do think it really helps to have some representation though, because without one, there's problems: * People with fast speed either always get there first or always get there at the same time, depending on whether the DM figures for it. * Flanking is much harder to do, which is a problem for Rogues. * Area spells are often either always perfectly targetted or always end up hitting your teammates, again dependant on the DM. * It can take a lot longer if people have to constantly ask the DM where others are relative to them, and because they can't plan their move ahead of time turns take longer. * Smart tactics, like formations or using the terrain to your advantage, tend to either always work perfectly or never work, depending on the DM.
Orayn, Elvish Blademaster 08-24-05, 05:30 PM	I think a grid has an inherent advantage for tactical gameplay, especially for flanking, determining distances, and getting a better overall idea of the battle's layout. However, I wouldn't bind myself too closely to the nitty-gritty technicalities that accompany grid usage. For things like cover, fighting around corners, and diagonal movement, I'd rather wing it and keep things easy to manage.
Shemeska the Marauder 08-24-05, 11:30 PM	I'm a newer D&D player and I've heard D&D can be played without a bourd and miniatures if so how, this style of play sounds like it could save me alot of money and preperation time. I don't use a board or miniatures (though I suppose I would if the players desired it). I'll draw out the environment if the players request it, but that's usually only for combats with a very complex terrain and/or tons of combatants. None of the groups I've ever played with or run for in the past 5 years that I've played DnD have ever routinely used minis or a board. Everything is described by the DM and not hammered down; we're playing DnD not playing a boardgame or Warhammer40k or something like that. But ultimately it's just a stylistic issue and if you want a more descriptive, more free flowing and less restrictive game, or if you desire a more wargamey/tactical game. I obviously like the first and not the second, some people (usually people who started in 1e or earlier I find) seem to rabidly prefer the more tactical style.
Edymnion 08-25-05, 12:31 AM	Can and IMO should. Just ditch AoOs for movement.Why? I run all but the most complicated battles in my head, so do my players, and I use full AoO rules. Its not hard, once you learn to think along those lines. After all, the pros can play entire games of chess without a board or pieces, just keeping track of the entire thing in their heads, and D&D combat (with full AoO) is actually much less complicated than chess.
Searchin' 08-25-05, 03:33 AM	...old school. :D :D YEAH!! ...Just remember to tell them where the enemy is at least a round before they over-run your PCs. ;)
Tenzhi 08-25-05, 03:47 AM	Why? Because they're a useless, contextually nonsensical, and altogether unnecessary complication to the game.
Another Gnome 08-25-05, 05:01 AM	Complication, schmomplication. The beauty of the AoO is precisely that it makes combat interesting by rewarding the player for tactical thinking.
RDQ 08-25-05, 01:51 PM	My group jus uses a mix of all of them. It gets pretty entertainin that way.
Tenzhi 08-26-05, 01:33 AM	Complication, schmomplication. The beauty of the AoO is precisely that it makes combat interesting by rewarding the player for tactical thinking. Tactical, schmactical. Unless you use facing rules and hand out AoOs to people attacking from behind, the AoOs for movement are nonsense. The notion that a person can be surrounded by 8+ attackers and not leave himself open to extra attacks, yet that same person leaves himself open moving past a lone kobold, is laughable at best. The only tactical thinking it encourages is board game rather than fantasy combat. Not that tactical board games aren't fun - I for one enjoy a good game of Navia Dratp - but there's a time and a place, and IMO the middle of an RPG ain't it. Other people may feel differently, and more power to 'em, but the reasoning behind was asked for and I was simply giving one version of it.
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-26-05, 01:38 AM	Why? I run all but the most complicated battles in my head, so do my players, and I use full AoO rules. Its not hard, once you learn to think along those lines. After all, the pros can play entire games of chess without a board or pieces, just keeping track of the entire thing in their heads, and D&D combat (with full AoO) is actually much less complicated than chess. Five Foot Step Waltz, man
weasel fierce 08-26-05, 03:24 AM	I find the Attacks of opportunity to be a well intentioned rule, that simply doesnt do, what it aims to do.
Lorianne 08-26-05, 04:17 AM	I'm using Chessex' Battlemat & Megamat for the more complicated battles and maps. We use dice instead of miniatures (can't use all hundreds of them for rolling anyway :P). I've got 'misprinted' versions of both maps (meaning that they've got slight production errors; some stripes and spots on the back :rolleyes: ), find yourself some of those, they're a hell of a lot cheaper. You can draw on them and wipe it all off, it works perfect. I don't get it out for simple things, but some of my players sometimes have difficulties picturing the battlefield. I use full AoO/reach/flanking/whatever rules in both scenarios, works fine.
Tenzhi 08-26-05, 04:29 AM	:shifty: Were I going to use AoO, grids, and/or miniatures (and I'm not even beginning to suggest that the thought has ever entertained the notion of crossing my mind)... :shifty: I might use Heroscape terrain. But even then only for large and important battles.
Faeirlyte 08-26-05, 09:32 AM	Rule books are wonderful, and if people are into grids and minis, that is fine, too. It is part of a hobby. But the best thing about D&D is that you can change rules, so long as you let the players know beforehand, and you can create your own adventures. I am old school. Graph paper and a pencil. We seem to have the most fun using our minds and being creative, rather than worrying too much about the formalities. It is one thing to move 2 steps and go falling down some trap into a hole of goop. It is another thing to worry about who is exactly where at all moments and how much damage someone might get if they receive a slight bruise from something. Make it your own game.
StormCrow42 08-26-05, 11:08 AM	Tactical, schmactical. Unless you use facing rules and hand out AoOs to people attacking from behind, the AoOs for movement are nonsense. The notion that a person can be surrounded by 8+ attackers and not leave himself open to extra attacks, yet that same person leaves himself open moving past a lone kobold, is laughable at best. Flanking bonuses is what being surrounded gets you (or rather the opponents that surround you).
Tenzhi 08-26-05, 11:51 AM	Flanking bonuses is what being surrounded gets you (or rather the opponents that surround you). Indeed, which generally isn't near the detriment that AoOs are, yet being surrounded is a situation where you would definitely and detrimentally leave openings in your defense - whilst simply moving past someone is not. But that's just looking for things to make sense in at least a quasi-sensible non-board-game fashion. If you look at it as a tactical board game, it's a rule that makes as much sense as only being able to move on diagonals (which is how priests will move in 4th Ed I hear; rogues will move only in straight horizontal/vertical lines; fighters will move in mixtures of horizontal and vertical lines at a ration of 2:1; and mages will only be able to take 5' steps, but in any direction).
Centauri 08-26-05, 12:04 PM	being surrounded is a situation where you would definitely and detrimentally leave openings in your defense - whilst simply moving past someone is not. That's why you aren't any easier to hit when moving past someone. I like the rules for attacks of opportunity for movement. Maneuvering around a battlefield should be a risky business and people who bother with learning Tumble, or taking Mobilty and Spring Attack should be better at it.
Tenzhi 08-26-05, 12:26 PM	That's why you aren't any easier to hit when moving past someone. An extra attempt to hit, is in fact making it easier to hit you bonus or no.
Centauri 08-26-05, 12:40 PM	An extra attempt to hit, is in fact making it easier to hit you bonus or no. Compared to not getting the attempt at all, sure, but not compared to getting a flanking bonus. To be honest, I have a little trouble conceptualizing attacks of opportunity and describing them to my players, but I like them anyway.
Tenzhi 08-27-05, 02:00 AM	Compared to not getting the attempt at all, sure, but not compared to getting a flanking bonus. A flanking bonus is +2, as I recall. That's a 10% better chance to hit. Unless I'm mistaken, in any situation where you have a better than 20% chance to hit (a 20% chance to hit meaning that you would have to roll a 17-20), getting an extra chance at that percentage will be better than getting the 10% bonus; at 20% they will be about the same; and below 20% the 10% bonus will be better. Hence, generally speaking getting the extra attack is a better bonus. The fact that conceptually they don't make sense (again, unless you simply think of it as a board game) is another matter entirely.
Gilean 08-27-05, 04:33 AM	Listen to Edymnion. There is absolutely no need for miniatures or battlemaps.
Junon Ghostblade 08-27-05, 11:56 AM	Do yourself a favour and ignore the majority of 3rd's crappy combat system. Minis are a complete waste of time and money IMO. D&D is a game meant for dice and paper. WotC is just trying to scam people out of more money by trying to involve something in the game that it really doesn't need. Do yourself and your players a favour and don't use them.
Centauri 08-27-05, 12:35 PM	Hence, generally speaking getting the extra attack is a better bonus. I see what you're saying. Even still, it makes sense to me that trying to move around a battlefield would incur some risk.
Edymnion 08-28-05, 07:16 PM	Five Foot Step Waltz, manWhich is a good thing, and very realistic. Nobody actually fights by planting themselves in one spot and trading blows. "Stick and move, stick and move!" is a common thing to hear in boxing. "Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee". You stop long enough to make a steady attack, then you get back to moving around as much as you can. Dancing around the battlefield with 5' steps isn't silly, its actually a very good approximation of real world combat. I mean, otherwise, why would anyone have a fighting arena of any kind that was more than 10' square, if the combatants weren't expected to move around everywhere?
Tyler Do'Urden 08-28-05, 07:20 PM	Dancing around the battlefield with 5' steps isn't silly, its actually a very good approximation of real world combat. I mean, otherwise, why would anyone have a fighting arena of any kind that was more than 10' square, if the combatants weren't expected to move around everywhere? Yeah, remember The Princess Bride (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093779/)? Inego vs. Wesley? They be five-foot-steppin' all up and down that joint. Yo. *cough* Seriously, take about three months of karate, taekwondo, or kempo classes (if you need them) and then try sparring in a ten-foot square. It's hard. You don't realize how badly you wanna back up until you can't.
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-30-05, 03:26 AM	Which is a good thing, and very realistic. Nobody actually fights by planting themselves in one spot and trading blows. "Stick and move, stick and move!" is a common thing to hear in boxing. "Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee". You stop long enough to make a steady attack, then you get back to moving around as much as you can. Dancing around the battlefield with 5' steps isn't silly, its actually a very good approximation of real world combat. I mean, otherwise, why would anyone have a fighting arena of any kind that was more than 10' square, if the combatants weren't expected to move around everywhere? But the five foot stepping isn't about keeping your feet moving in combat, its about metagaming to avoid AoO's for spellcasting and potion quaffing. My problem's not with the 5ft step, it's with the 'waltz' that happens as everyone tries to buff, quaff or fire from ranged about every four rounds.
fukachu 08-30-05, 05:26 AM	Paper and: pencil,magic marker+transparent a2 sheet over graph paper, coins, d12's they're not used for much else but thats a whole nother story. Not to put too fine a point on it all players need to be able to understand is where they are in relation top each other and the rest they can clarify "so to get to the half orc/dime wizard will the ogre d12 next to that table get an AoO?" Minatures well ......... From 1974 to 2003 these items were considered optional. That WotC has altered the rules to the extent that a newer player doesn't even know how to play without them is... Eh, I'm just not going to go there. Like others have mentioned, use a piece of paper and a pencil. R.A. I am going to go there. So you have a game in which after the initial outlay for 3 books and dice you never need buy another thing. So cashflow figures don't look like they can grow much unless..........WotC make miniatures part of all facets of dnd, hell there is even a question on diagonal movement over squares on the herald level DM test. Then, if say you have to represent all monsters with a minature, thats a lot of miniatures. Then this is the killer bit for me like the 4 hotdogs 6 hotdog bun concpiracy; package them in a fashion that means you get a set selection so it would require many repeat purchases to build up a large group of core critters like orcs, ogres etc. How are the cashflows looking now(not good for you but you do have a veritable army of rust monsters) Sensational WotC shouts, now back to pumping out the fifth new Magic the Gathering release this week(or a sourcebook on a campaign world filled with sentinent rust monsters with class levels, on the plus side your rust monsters are now useful, down side you need to buy the source book, oh and the rust monster shaman model comes with a xorn, ythark etc in its box. The froghurt is also cursed) Cynical, me? no. Oh I dont use minatures by the way. However if you indeed chose to here is my tip, find someone selling of there old warhammer armies on ebay etc. and you will get a plethora of minatures for much less.
fukachu 08-30-05, 05:38 AM	sorry about annoying double post but 5ft step hah we call it the 5ft avoid, Tenzhi is making a lot of sense with his surrounded vs moving past shenanigans. Remember though barring combat reflexes only one a turn.
Sapp 08-30-05, 06:03 AM	What's realistic about a level 1 fighter being restricted to one attack every six seconds?
rogueattorney 08-30-05, 02:08 PM	Minatures well ......... I am going to go there. So you have a game in which after the initial outlay for 3 books and dice you never need buy another thing. So cashflow figures don't look like they can grow much unless..........WotC make miniatures part of all facets of dnd, hell there is even a question on diagonal movement over squares on the herald level DM test. Then, if say you have to represent all monsters with a minature, thats a lot of miniatures. Then this is the killer bit for me like the 4 hotdogs 6 hotdog bun concpiracy; package them in a fashion that means you get a set selection so it would require many repeat purchases to build up a large group of core critters like orcs, ogres etc. How are the cashflows looking now(not good for you but you do have a veritable army of rust monsters) Sensational WotC shouts, now back to pumping out the fifth new Magic the Gathering release this week(or a sourcebook on a campaign world filled with sentinent rust monsters with class levels, on the plus side your rust monsters are now useful, down side you need to buy the source book, oh and the rust monster shaman model comes with a xorn, ythark etc in its box. The froghurt is also cursed) Cynical, me? no. Oh I dont use minatures by the way. However if you indeed chose to here is my tip, find someone selling of there old warhammer armies on ebay etc. and you will get a plethora of minatures for much less. :D
Kem 08-31-05, 03:37 AM	But the five foot stepping isn't about keeping your feet moving in combat, its about metagaming to avoid AoO's for spellcasting and potion quaffing. My problem's not with the 5ft step, it's with the 'waltz' that happens as everyone tries to buff, quaff or fire from ranged about every four rounds. Yeap. You back up if able to to do those things. Meaning if your opponent wants to leave they can, if they want to do something they can and also... They can do an action like cast a spell then move their full move because you don't threaten them anymore. People say its cheesy, but they always fail to see what they really give their opposition.
fukachu 08-31-05, 08:40 AM	Apologies for huge post. If can't be bothered what I said below is Fighters and Sorcerers are the best and below is unequivocally why.......... To go outside of game for a second and assess the 5ft step and AoOs from a rule and game writing perspective think of this. Monsters almost always outnumber PC's. If surrounding someone got you an AoO, then the benefit is most likely to fall to monsters. While against lone BBEG or as PC's advance and feats and tactical mobility becomes available this wouldn't be a significant issue, at low levels it would be a nightmare. PC's would have to be very cautious about entering multi monster melee. A group of low level PC's facing a group of 9 kobolds becomes a lot more dangerous, the Kobolds could use their numbers to swarm over the meat bodies, surround, double attack thanks to AoO and consume, then move onto the now defenceless mana bodies. Survivability of starting characters would be miniscule and DM shields everywhere would look like the nose art of a B-17 in 1943. Granted combat is often decided by the greater numbers. We have to realise that DnD's basic premise is a small group against overwhelming odds and so realism needs to be eschewed a little. The other obvious response is, the low level party just needs to be smarter and choose their fights. This brings up two points; firstly by allowing flankers or surrounding attackers an AoO combat would become so dangerous it would require almost perfect tactical execution. Something that would bite on some peoples game enjoyment, as not everyone is Tordek Rommel. Secondly if Pc's are to choose their fights and fight smarter they need to have some way of maneuvreing without exposing themselves to physical prejudice and to ensure they don't get surrounded. The answer is the five foot step. I could imagine that during play testing flanking was probably AoO and 5 ft step was the means of tactical travel but once the lethality of 'oh your surrounded huh, well its a 25 point, point buy Mr Pirhana Puree' became obvious they probably toned it down. The +2 for flanking and dex dropout ensured PC's had to fight smart and not get surrounded. While the retention of the AoO for critters or characters moving through a threatened area helped the PC frontline protect the mages. The 5 ft step presumably was also retained to allow for the 'tactical two step' if thats your thing. Oh and I lied about fighter / sorcerer proof, yeah sorry, that holy grail is elsewhere I'm sure
Cregar 08-31-05, 03:35 PM	A pad of graph paper and a box of freshly sharpened pencils...mm, mmm, old school. I agree with you there... maybe add in a few pennies, nickles and dimes :-)
fukachu 09-17-05, 09:05 AM	Ah reviveing an old thread I can smell the dust. However the point I wanted to make was not using graph paper but a regular sheet, why you ask? Because if you use graph paper it is assumed you have everything to scale, a tough ask if it is an on the fly encounter or if you do a lot of on the fly adventuring it means you have to think very clearly as you draw the map. The solution have plain paper and that way the Dm(which is primarily what I am) can allow attacks of opportunities at the right time, or let the pc's maneuvre without one if need be.
KJW 09-17-05, 09:51 AM	In 18 years I have used minis only a few times, but in my opinion they slow down roleplaying. If you break out the minis expect a lengthy battle and rather uninspired roleplaying and predictable actions from your players. If I want that I would break out my dusty battletech stuff. Remove the minis and you get some real excitement. Now still maybe draw a crude map to give reference if needed, but your time is better spent thinking about roleplaying opportunities in combat than setting up a battle grid. The more that is in you and your players' minds the better, this is the point of roleplaying, using your imagination.
GuruChaz 09-17-05, 12:07 PM	I'm a newer D&D player and I've heard D&D can be played without a bourd and miniatures if so how, this style of play sounds like it could save me alot of money and preperation time. Personally, I wish all the adventure modules would start coming with their own grid layouts for each area of the adventure...or at least an optional map grid setup diagram in each published adventure for the DM to use.
BladeMage_1 09-17-05, 01:29 PM	We used mimis. But only because one of my players INSITED we needed them and bought all of ours. IMO, I'd rather use my Imagination. much more fun. However, I'm a DM, so all is already laid out for me. (THAT'S the fun part.) :D
Kursk 09-18-05, 11:35 AM	I'm a newer D&D player and I've heard D&D can be played without a bourd and miniatures if so how, this style of play sounds like it could save me alot of money and preperation time. Of course. Just use dice on the table if you need to clarify arrangement of people during combat.