Another battle-map idea [Archive] - Wizards Community

Another battle-map idea [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
zioth
10-09-03, 07:14 PM I've been thinking about battle maps lately, and how unrealistic they are.

For example: There's a pillar in a 5' square, so you can't enter the square. Well, what if the pillar is only 1' in diameter? Why can't you fight with your back to it?

Or how about this: I'm running away from something that's much bigger than me, but runs at the same speed. Can't I turn some tight corner to give myself an advantage?

Well, here's my idea for a more realistic battle map. I have not play-tested this, so I'd like to hear from other DMs. Is this really more realistic? Is it practical? What advantages and disadvantages do you see? If you've actually tried this, let me know how it went.

Equipment needed: A battle mat and a ruler or tape-measure.

1: Use a plain battle mat, without squares or hexes (or ignore them on a marked map). Now walls don't have to be built in 5' increments, 3' doors and corridors are possible, and the DM doesn't have to be careful that objects and creatures fit exactly into the squares.

2: One inch (or centimeter, or whatever) equals five feet. Use whatever scale is appropriate to the size of the battle.

3: When a character moves 30', measure 30' with the ruler. The distance does not have to be in a straight line, and can go any any angle or combination of angles, or curves if you're using a tape-measure. To avoid this process getting too slow, allow a leeway of 5' or so. That way, it's okay if your measurements aren't perfect. If you think rulers and tape-measures are too clunky, measure out 10", 15" and 30" lengths of string, and use those to approximate distances.

4: The DM is responsible for a little more using this method. He has to decide when an approximation is too far off.

A couple rules have to change for this to work. Off the top of my head:
* An AoO is allowed whenever one character moves through the weapon-range of another. This range is a circle that surrounds the character.
* Characters are too crowded to fight with weapons if they have less than 5' between them. Characters can, however, fight back-to-back or use similar strategies that put them closer together. What's allowed here has to be thought out more completely, or the DM can just make rulings as situations come up.
* Spells and grenade effects can be centered at any point. Creatures within the range are affected.

I think a group could get pretty fast at using rulers, tape measures or string, so that it wouldn't be too much slower than squares and hexes. The string method would probably work better on a peg-board than a battle-map.

The main advantage is that battles could be more like real battles, and less like some strategy wargame.

So what do you think?
chris7476
10-09-03, 07:22 PM This is a great idea and all but one of the main reasons of the squares is speed. Having to get out a ruler each time to measure will slow down combat a LOT. Also, what do you if the battle is very crowded? Squares help dictate space and distance very quickly. Sure, it's not a perfect system but D&D is not really about being perfect or ultra-realistic.

If you do implement this, I would be interested to hear how it works though. I've kind of thought of experimenting with hexes for this very reason but I haven't yet.
zioth
10-10-03, 02:12 PM Originally posted by chris7476
This is a great idea and all but one of the main reasons of the squares is speed. Having to get out a ruler each time to measure will slow down combat a LOT.
I suppose a ruler could slow things down, but how about the measured strings idea? Keep the most common lengths around, representing 5', 10', 15', 20' and 30', and then use those to measure distances. Keep only one set of strings at the table so they don't get cluttered, and find some way to keep them from getting tangled or mixed up (maybe five different colors?)

If a group got used to this, it might actually speed up combat. When you ask "now where can I move to this round?" you can answer just by touching one end of the string to your character, and swinging it around to look at all possible locations. With squares, you have to count the distance in every direction seperately.

You could even tie a "reach" string to each miniature, so that you could quickly measure the character's reach. You could even have characters with reaches that aren't a multiple of 5'. You might say a dagger has a reach of 3', while a longsword has 5' and a lance has 10'.

Originally posted by chris7476
Also, what do you if the battle is very crowded? Squares help dictate space and distance very quickly. Sure, it's not a perfect system but D&D is not really about being perfect or ultra-realistic.
The strings idea should keep a crowded battle from causing too many problems. If your string is getting tangled up in all the other miniatures, it just means you're going to suffer a LOT of AoOs.

Sure, D&D isn't meant to be totally realistic, but I frequently get annoyed when I want to do something that makes sense, but some rule gets in my way. If this idea doesn't end up costing too much extra time, I think it would be worth it for the added realism.

Originally posted by chris7476
If you do implement this, I would be interested to hear how it works though. I've kind of thought of experimenting with hexes for this very reason but I haven't yet.
Since I'm not currently a DM in a live game (I play in a live game, and I DM a PBeM), it may be a while before I can give this a try.

I tried hexes once. Their main advantages are that they allow more natural room-shapes, and that movement is simpler. That wierd 'first diagonal is 5 feet and next diagonal is 10 feet' rule becomes unnecesarry.
chris7476
10-10-03, 02:37 PM I tried hexes once. Their main advantages are that they allow more natural room-shapes, and that movement is simpler. That wierd 'first diagonal is 5 feet and next diagonal is 10 feet' rule becomes unnecesarry.

I think the main problem is with flanking and threatened space right? Meaning that you threaten a larger area and more opponents can attack you at once.
gnimish
10-10-03, 02:50 PM Rulers and string... Ah yes - brings me back to my first edition (and before) days, where everything was measured in inches. Yep. Character speed, ranges, you name it. Of course, one inch was 10 feet in those days. Pesky inflation - now you only get half as much movement per inch!

Squares do simplify things nicely - but also over-simplify. I must admit I tend to fall too easily into the trap myself. All architecture is based on multiples of the celestial number 5.

Hexes do help break that habit, but it can be tricky to draw the right measurements on the 'ol mat - it's much more time consuming than counting squares.

And yes - you can stand in a "square" that has a 1 foot diameter column in it - however, you lose some bonuses for being "squeezed" into the space. Essentially, you give up some of your range of movement.
PenderGrass
10-10-03, 02:52 PM I use the 'NO FREAKING GRID' method myself and it works great

much better and more intuitive

I have used it since day 1 of playing and will continue to do so until I can't roll dice anymore

I highly recommend everyone dump the square and get circular!
chris7476
10-10-03, 03:16 PM So can you give us some details if your system Pender?
PenderGrass
10-10-03, 03:43 PM So can you give us some details if your system Pender?

Quick notes - but ask specifics if you so desire -

1. I bought some small, thin, circular wood disks to use as mounts for figures - they range in diameter size from 1" to 3" and you can either glue them to each individual figure base or just place under the figure as needed.

2. We use laser pointers to check LOS.

3. We use tape measures (and string as needed).

4. Pizza Box stands - little 3-legged 'tables' that a local pizza company uses to help support the pizza box and keep it from collapsing onto the pizza are useful to represent flying creatures.

5. I vary back and forth between the normal vinyl battlemat (for eraseable pens and drawing maps on) and a felt 'paper' of grass-green color for when I use my Dwarven Forge sets, Terrain Features (hills, trees and so forth).

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
zioth 10-09-03, 07:14 PM	I've been thinking about battle maps lately, and how unrealistic they are. For example: There's a pillar in a 5' square, so you can't enter the square. Well, what if the pillar is only 1' in diameter? Why can't you fight with your back to it? Or how about this: I'm running away from something that's much bigger than me, but runs at the same speed. Can't I turn some tight corner to give myself an advantage? Well, here's my idea for a more realistic battle map. I have not play-tested this, so I'd like to hear from other DMs. Is this really more realistic? Is it practical? What advantages and disadvantages do you see? If you've actually tried this, let me know how it went. Equipment needed: A battle mat and a ruler or tape-measure. 1: Use a plain battle mat, without squares or hexes (or ignore them on a marked map). Now walls don't have to be built in 5' increments, 3' doors and corridors are possible, and the DM doesn't have to be careful that objects and creatures fit exactly into the squares. 2: One inch (or centimeter, or whatever) equals five feet. Use whatever scale is appropriate to the size of the battle. 3: When a character moves 30', measure 30' with the ruler. The distance does not have to be in a straight line, and can go any any angle or combination of angles, or curves if you're using a tape-measure. To avoid this process getting too slow, allow a leeway of 5' or so. That way, it's okay if your measurements aren't perfect. If you think rulers and tape-measures are too clunky, measure out 10", 15" and 30" lengths of string, and use those to approximate distances. 4: The DM is responsible for a little more using this method. He has to decide when an approximation is too far off. A couple rules have to change for this to work. Off the top of my head: * An AoO is allowed whenever one character moves through the weapon-range of another. This range is a circle that surrounds the character. * Characters are too crowded to fight with weapons if they have less than 5' between them. Characters can, however, fight back-to-back or use similar strategies that put them closer together. What's allowed here has to be thought out more completely, or the DM can just make rulings as situations come up. * Spells and grenade effects can be centered at any point. Creatures within the range are affected. I think a group could get pretty fast at using rulers, tape measures or string, so that it wouldn't be too much slower than squares and hexes. The string method would probably work better on a peg-board than a battle-map. The main advantage is that battles could be more like real battles, and less like some strategy wargame. So what do you think?
chris7476 10-09-03, 07:22 PM	This is a great idea and all but one of the main reasons of the squares is speed. Having to get out a ruler each time to measure will slow down combat a LOT. Also, what do you if the battle is very crowded? Squares help dictate space and distance very quickly. Sure, it's not a perfect system but D&D is not really about being perfect or ultra-realistic. If you do implement this, I would be interested to hear how it works though. I've kind of thought of experimenting with hexes for this very reason but I haven't yet.
zioth 10-10-03, 02:12 PM	Originally posted by chris7476 This is a great idea and all but one of the main reasons of the squares is speed. Having to get out a ruler each time to measure will slow down combat a LOT. I suppose a ruler could slow things down, but how about the measured strings idea? Keep the most common lengths around, representing 5', 10', 15', 20' and 30', and then use those to measure distances. Keep only one set of strings at the table so they don't get cluttered, and find some way to keep them from getting tangled or mixed up (maybe five different colors?) If a group got used to this, it might actually speed up combat. When you ask "now where can I move to this round?" you can answer just by touching one end of the string to your character, and swinging it around to look at all possible locations. With squares, you have to count the distance in every direction seperately. You could even tie a "reach" string to each miniature, so that you could quickly measure the character's reach. You could even have characters with reaches that aren't a multiple of 5'. You might say a dagger has a reach of 3', while a longsword has 5' and a lance has 10'. Originally posted by chris7476 Also, what do you if the battle is very crowded? Squares help dictate space and distance very quickly. Sure, it's not a perfect system but D&D is not really about being perfect or ultra-realistic. The strings idea should keep a crowded battle from causing too many problems. If your string is getting tangled up in all the other miniatures, it just means you're going to suffer a LOT of AoOs. Sure, D&D isn't meant to be totally realistic, but I frequently get annoyed when I want to do something that makes sense, but some rule gets in my way. If this idea doesn't end up costing too much extra time, I think it would be worth it for the added realism. Originally posted by chris7476 If you do implement this, I would be interested to hear how it works though. I've kind of thought of experimenting with hexes for this very reason but I haven't yet. Since I'm not currently a DM in a live game (I play in a live game, and I DM a PBeM), it may be a while before I can give this a try. I tried hexes once. Their main advantages are that they allow more natural room-shapes, and that movement is simpler. That wierd 'first diagonal is 5 feet and next diagonal is 10 feet' rule becomes unnecesarry.
chris7476 10-10-03, 02:37 PM	I tried hexes once. Their main advantages are that they allow more natural room-shapes, and that movement is simpler. That wierd 'first diagonal is 5 feet and next diagonal is 10 feet' rule becomes unnecesarry. I think the main problem is with flanking and threatened space right? Meaning that you threaten a larger area and more opponents can attack you at once.
gnimish 10-10-03, 02:50 PM	Rulers and string... Ah yes - brings me back to my first edition (and before) days, where everything was measured in inches. Yep. Character speed, ranges, you name it. Of course, one inch was 10 feet in those days. Pesky inflation - now you only get half as much movement per inch! Squares do simplify things nicely - but also over-simplify. I must admit I tend to fall too easily into the trap myself. All architecture is based on multiples of the celestial number 5. Hexes do help break that habit, but it can be tricky to draw the right measurements on the 'ol mat - it's much more time consuming than counting squares. And yes - you can stand in a "square" that has a 1 foot diameter column in it - however, you lose some bonuses for being "squeezed" into the space. Essentially, you give up some of your range of movement.
PenderGrass 10-10-03, 02:52 PM	I use the 'NO FREAKING GRID' method myself and it works great much better and more intuitive I have used it since day 1 of playing and will continue to do so until I can't roll dice anymore I highly recommend everyone dump the square and get circular!
chris7476 10-10-03, 03:16 PM	So can you give us some details if your system Pender?
PenderGrass 10-10-03, 03:43 PM	So can you give us some details if your system Pender? Quick notes - but ask specifics if you so desire - 1. I bought some small, thin, circular wood disks to use as mounts for figures - they range in diameter size from 1" to 3" and you can either glue them to each individual figure base or just place under the figure as needed. 2. We use laser pointers to check LOS. 3. We use tape measures (and string as needed). 4. Pizza Box stands - little 3-legged 'tables' that a local pizza company uses to help support the pizza box and keep it from collapsing onto the pizza are useful to represent flying creatures. 5. I vary back and forth between the normal vinyl battlemat (for eraseable pens and drawing maps on) and a felt 'paper' of grass-green color for when I use my Dwarven Forge sets, Terrain Features (hills, trees and so forth).