Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Coredump00 Jun 29, 2015 22:34:38	I don't mean Theater of the Mind... but using miniatures and distance, but measuring inches instead of counting squares.  I imagine there may be some extra difficulty in AL because of more rotating players etc.   I was wondering about any experiences folks have had using this with 5E, particulalry in AL.
#2 Nevvur Jun 30, 2015 0:13:42	Coredump00 wrote:
#3 ZHDarkstar Jun 30, 2015 8:40:58	Playing lots of Wild Arms XF has made me consider switching to hexes, because of the 1:1 diagonal bs.
(Reply to #3) Nevvur	ZHDarkstar wrote:
#5 Qzoo Jun 30, 2015 8:54:00	Specifically, for Adventurers League, I would not want to do anything that I feel slows down the session in any way.   It's been a challenge at times to stay within the time constraints.  And while I have no problems running in 4-hour slots (usually for various Indy RPGs and one-shots of my own creation), some of the complexity and the multitude of NPCs in some of these AL adventures really makes it feel like I'm doing a disservice to the players to gloss over the details in an effort to finish.  As a result of this circumstance, do I really want to add something like a measuring tape to the table for each person to be able to move their figures?  No.   To be clear though, I have actually done this in the past, and had no problems with it.  It isn't a bad way to do things if your map happens to not have a grid, but I don't think it offers enough to make a difference to the enjoyment of the game that I would pursue gridless gaming over gridded.
#6 Nevvur Jun 30, 2015 9:05:40	My intent (and what I have done in the past outside AL) is to play on a grid, but not snap-to-grid. The squares are still there for easy reference, but that's their only purpose. Judging most distances involves eyeball estimates, not actually measuring it with tools. When I felt the need for more accuracy, I used six inch pipe cleaners rather than a measuring tape, with permanent marker at 1 inch divisions. It was fast enough when called for, which was rare. I felt confident enough adjudicating stuff like reach/opportunity attacks and no one complained, though I can see how this might not settle well with rotating players.   Again, though, I'm lucky to have a regular group of awesome players.
#7 Coredump00 Jun 30, 2015 10:24:54	*PIPE CLEANERS*   brilliant.  I play 40K, and usually use tape measure,  or a plastic stick.  But getting around obstacles or making a 'curved' move is always a bit problematic.  I was trying to think of something that would allow for measuring turns and such.  Pipe cleaners seem like a great idea.       As for the time issue....  I think the measuring is faster than the counting, especially when folks change their mind and need to count again, or lose track and have to recount.  But laying down a 6" stick (or pipe cleaner) is super fast. OTOH, I asked because it may still require a learning curve, and I don't know how long that may take.  That might make it probematic if you continually have different players.
(Reply to #4) Pauper	Nevvur wrote:
#9 mrpopstar Jul 01, 2015 14:27:21	Coredump00 wrote:
#10 Tyranthraxus Jul 02, 2015 1:03:26	I attempted to in one of the combats  in Foulness under Mulmaster, but it bogged down to an argument between myself and a player over where they through they were and where I thought they were and the fact that they had moved but not actually told me they had moved. So I stopped right after that.   I might try again if that player isnt there.
#11 Nevvur Jul 03, 2015 0:13:01	A rather brief and nondescript game report, but going gridless worked out well for tonight's game. The players raised no objections. Combats actually seemed a bit faster, since people were eyeballing distances rather than counting squares. No situations arose where an opportunity attack was debatable, though that remains my biggest concern moving into the future.
#12 Coredump00 Jul 03, 2015 8:21:38	How do you determin 'melee' distance and AO range. DO you use a ful inch?  (WIth a grid the actual distance between bases is much smaller than an inch.)
#13 Nevvur Jul 03, 2015 10:11:14	We just ... looked, I guess? If a proposed melee distance appeared to be about the same distance as snap-to-grid, it was close enough.   When it came to skirting around an enemy to avoid OAs, I advised players to keep a full square between their character and the opponent. While it is true the distance between two minis (at their closest facing surfaces) is less than a square, the narrative distance they represent actually places them anywhere from grappling (0 feet of distance) to the far edges of their respective squares (almost 10 feet).    Both instances of an OA in last night's game involved two combatants who had already been engaged in melee with one another, so there was no question if they were within 5 feet of each other. Circumstances never arose where someone simply wanted to circle around an enemy close enough that they might provoke an OA, but I'm confident enough I can adjudicate it fairly with just eyeballing it. Honestly, I don't think this method will work well for DMs or players who have an adversarial relationship (i.e. one or both thinks its their job to 'beat' the other) but again, I have a good bunch of regulars who trust I have their best interests in mind: that we all have fun and the players are challenged.
#14 Coredump00 Jul 03, 2015 15:49:24	Cool....  I figured that 'eyeballing' or 'winging' it would work pretty well, just wasn't sure if you had any special insights or experiences.   It doesn't look like I will be DMing for a bit, but if and when I try it I'll let you know.