Theater of the Mind Combat

[bigbluepaw]

Hey folks. I've been listening to a lot of D&D sessions run by Chris Perkins of WotC. Almost everything he does for Dice, Camera, Action is theater of the mind combat. There are no battlemaps. He just kind of adjudicates if opponents are grouped, how far away they are, and who is attacking whom.

How many of you are doing the same thing?

It seems like such a practice would be easier with Fantasy Grounds, as the combat tracker allows for easy targeting. Furthermore, it certainly would make it easier in terms of prep time. You don't need to track down nearly as many battlemaps.

[Halfront]

see these threads:

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?43227-Theatrical-Maps

[LordEntrails]

I don't do much TotM. I find battle maps are easy to find or make. I like the precision of maps.

But, TotM is a great way to play if you and your players like it.

[Targas]

Hey folks. I've been listening to a lot of D&D sessions run by Chris Perkins of WotC. Almost everything he does for Dice, Camera, Action is theater of the mind combat. There are no battlemaps. He just kind of adjudicates if opponents are grouped, how far away they are, and who is attacking whom.
If you like this way of running combat encounters, maybe you should have a look at the 13th Age ruleset from Pelgrane Press. It is using exactly this kind of combat, to speed up things, as well has a couple of other good idea‘s you can use in any roleplaying system - or use in 13th Age itself.

Delux-Oz is currently working on implementing 13th Age as a Fantasy Grounds ruleset, btw. It should be ready for release very (soon). :)

[JML]

I've got the feeling that most people tend to play AD&D style around here, which points you toward battle maps. That's an original quirk of the game system. Others aren't so insisting on it. And playing online using a VTT software pushes also in this direction.

I'm only playing face to face in a local RPG club in which we must be around 70 members by now, playing something like 23 campaigns, among which there's only 3 D20 system based games. And this is the most simultaneous D20 games I've seen in ten years. I'm not saying D20 is a bad game in any way. Just that this game type is a minority in this specific context: french rpg club.

To the point now: a fairly significant number of tables don't use battle maps. We've got some small white boards and some GMs just make a quick sketch on a paper sheet. I even know GMs who frown battle maps: "We're no wargamers. We're role players!"

Of course this attitude is a bit stupid. That's just a choice a GM should do based on his taste and gaming style. I enjoy both depending of the gaming style I need: if it's the game type where mood is important and combats might come in the way, or if it's a casual combat, TotM is the way I often go. On the other side, if combat is important in the game style or is a climax, then I find a good battle map useful.

TotM is swifter and if you're good at it you can make truly epic scenes, or humorous, or whatever. Mood is the word. A battle map makes combats longer and grittier. Players have time to ponder, wether on their strategy or dire situation ;) But that's tactical thinking.

I don't think there's one answer. It all depends of what you're aiming at. My advice would be: "give it a try". Just be careful you do it in the right circumstances, which may not be your usual campaign… and warning the players may be a good idea too :)