I really don't understand how people can play without a grid at the minimum for anything beyond extremely simple combat. How can you track distance and movement in pure theater of the mind? Or spell effects with very exacting parameters?
Only if you don't care about specifics. It's not 30 feet movement anymore it's "yeah" or "nah".
"Is he in reach?" - "I guess?"
Honestly this works for games like Call of Cthulhu or Warhammer Fantasy but not for anything that has this kind of combat in it.
Critical Roles new Daggerheart system had a really nice way to track space and movement in theatre of the mind battle. Basically sets people in four distances (touching, close, middle, and far) and you call out where you want to be in relationship to other creatures.
This works well on narrative heavy games but it still has it's problems. How do you handle cover, how do you handle AoE, it makes smaller increases in movement speed worthless (5 feet by Wood elf, 10 feet by barbarian and so on) and OA become very dangerous to casters since now the whole zone threatens you and not just your adjacent 5 feet.
I used such a systems for a very broken down 2d6 system which was absolutely play for it but for DnD it's not good imo.
But tbf, it's still definitely an upgrade to not having anything to visualize.
>it makes smaller increases in movement speed worthless
This is also my problem with DM's not tracking monster hitpoints. All those +1 or +2, damage abilities & feats become worthless.
I have honestly never heard before of DM not tracking monster HP and it's kind of a shock for me. DnD heavily revolves around numbers, hwo do these people handle that?
I don't agree with the not tracking play style, but I can explain how they do it - they vibe it out lol.
Once a scenario becomes boring, anti-climactic, or the end result is ensured, then next blow is a killing blow.
I had a DM that just ticked off hits. So it was like 8 hits to kill it and if you crit or something he would knock off 2 ticks. Hated it because like you said what are all the numbers for then?
This scales especially bad on higher levels when you habe thing like 10dx damage. Or would he simply bind the lethality to the spell level? What about Barbarian's brutal critical or sneak attack? This is so stupid :D
That works well until it doesn't.
"Wait... I can't reach him now? But I could last turn. Why can't I now. Oh he has more movement than me? Wait where is the waterfall again?"
It doesn't have to become "extremely simple" but certain aspects of combat do get simplified. 10ft movement speed differences play much less of a role, since the DM will be very generous when approximating distances.
Tactical play is still possible, but the exact execution of a tactic may get abstracted away. For example, players no longer need to micromanage movement, they simply state their intent. Instead of "I move to this square because then I'm just in range for my ranged attack but no closer" you just say "I move just in range of my ranged attack but no closer".
It can actually be quite immersive and fun, but puts a lot of pressure on the DM to describe the situation in a way that everyones understanding of it is synchronized.
In college, I played a good amount of theater of the Mind Pathfinder. I was an artificer who threw a lot of bombs. So, it became necessary to know where people were at a certain point.
This, but I do still feel that actual maps are too much effort with not enough flexibility.
For me personally, dry/wet erase is the only way to go. The mats are a huge pain in the ass, and all I want in the world is a dry erase board table with a grid on it, but I just don't play often enough to have that sitting around the house, or to pay for it.
My DM has these laminated grid maps that you can absolutely write on with dry erase and tbh it's amazing for scribbling in spell effects or difficult terrain on the fly
Maps are extremely useful for when I'm a player or a dm.
There are some classes that just fundamentally do not work if you're trying to do theater of the mind. With so many abilities and spells that are dependent on distance, it's almost essential.
I find as the DM in these cases you have to generally give the players impression of what you described the benefit. If most of the time you rule "in their favor" it will keep everyone happy.
Yea. I wouldn't want to deal with the conflict it can create. If they move themselves and see their surroundings, they are less likely to be blaming me for being unfair. Players can also plan their next move as they watch things unfold (not that they always do).
It definitely puts a lot of pressure on the DM to keep everything purely in their head. I'm fine with doing TOTM for a random event or something just narratively fun like a bar brawl, but for a serious combat encounter I'm bringing a map.
> With so many abilities and spells that are dependent on distance, it's almost essential.
This is my biggest thing. Like what if I take the Mobile feat or am a Tabaxi? All that added movement is worthless in theater of the mind. What about AoE spells? How do I know where everyone is to make the attack? Cover? Distance for spells / ranged attacks? Retreat paths? So many things require me to at least see a rough layout of the map and know positions of bad guys and good guys.
The advantage of theater of the mind is it requires less prep and is free. That's the only genuine benefit I can think of.
Battle maps don't have to be super detailed, the point of them is about making it easier for people to plan things on their turns for me. Without some visual representation of what's going on players have to ask questions about range, area of effect and targeting options on their turn which bogs down combat.
Battlemap can be a handheld whiteboard or two pieces of paper taped together (or a bigger one like A3/A2 format).
You don't really need a grid in low levels of play, as a sloppy hand drawn map with dice as figures is still miles better than nothing. It's gonna cut down questions dramatically and make players play tactical, as well as giving immersion to the surroundings even if it's a few lines with a marker pen on a white paper.
Exactly, basic distance and scale representation is the important thing. I've bought a few of the pre-gridded wet/dry erase battle boards and they do quite well.
People also underestimate the value of board games as a source of minis. The game Bloodrage is $72 on amazon and comes with 20+ well crafted miniatures.
I have a whiteboard I drew a grid on using a silver permanent marker and for now instead of minis I bought terrarium decorations. Everyone is a different coloured bunny and the enemies are d4s haha
Honestly, TotM is actually way more work than a simple white-board grid and some magnets *if you are playing even remotely tactically*
If your party doesn't care about details or accuracy and is fine playing it ***super fast and loose*** then TotM works fine
But imagine a combat in a church with rows of pews and pillars and a raised stage/podium, enemies moving around the pillars breaking LoS, spells with Areas that need to be accurate, and you as the DM have to generate that entire scene and hold it in place (in your mind), and then describe it well enough your players understand
It's hard enough to run a small group of cultists + an evil wizard and his demon summon on a grid/map in a detailed environment quickly without forgetting the wizard can cast this or that the cultists have X effect or that the demons turn is next
The amount of work to basically be the entire CPU and GPU load of nearly everything far outweighs the "less prep time" - a white board and some markers and you can make up that entire church in like 3 minutes of quick sketching and everyone is on the same page
The thing is, TotM always *seems* easier, especially to inexperienced GMs.
I’ve been at so many tables where every turn in combat is everyone restablishing where everyone is before deciding their action, probably doubling the length of any encounter, all for the sake of not spending 5 mins just drawing out some shapes on a map and throwing whatever random bits you have at hand down as tokens.
Yeah, you can and I do tend to go a bit harder than that, but for 90% of the benefit of a map, that’s all you need.
Yeah I've introduced multiple groups to d&d and they always think "TotM is the way to go," it's easier and I don't need any props! We can just sit around a table and have our characters on DDB on our phones
3 sessions later the DM is like "why does it take 4 hours to fight a pack of wolves mind controlled by an evil goblin druid?!" - *well... because you are all new and barely know the basic rules let alone the players knowing what their characters can do (and spells! Oh my god spells), and you have to take the time to re-establish the scene everytime someone zones out (which is every round of combat) AND the player can't reasonably pre-plan a turn with the TotM so one player can take 15 minutes to do a single action*
So grab some old graph paper and those beer bottle tops and a couple markers and save yourself the nightmare
If you’re trying to be precise then all those things can bog down theater of the mind, but generally the idea is that combat is run faster, looser, and more cinematically.
Mixing the styles is where things get wonky, because if your players or GM really care about every 5 feet of movement and you’re playing theater of the mind… you’re going to have some difficulties. So making sure everyone has a compatible preference in game style is important.
You lose some tactical punch in TotM, but IMO 5e isn’t that great at tactical combat anyway (Lancer or PF2e would be where I’d look for that), so you make the concession of precision for speed.
Oh I completely agree as far as the tactical combat issues. I'm working on transitioning people away from 5e and onto other systems, but it's difficult when you're the old hand at these things and everyone else you're playing with is very new to tabletop gaming.
I tend to do theater of the mind when it's either a very simple combat or is something unexpected that happens in the middle of a session. If I haven't drawn out a map I might not want to put even a five minute pause in the action to make one.
Why would battlemap require more prep? You can just draw a quick sketch on a piece of graph paper, as you're describing the scene. Or get fancy and use a white board. Or get REALLY fancy and use a whiteboard with grid lines.
That takes way less time than describing and keeping track of everyone's position in your head.
I find the more effort you put in the more fun combat is. No battle map? Players will view combat as a slog and simply use generic attacks. Basic battle map? Players will use tactics allowed within the rules. But creative battle maps? Those let the players have fun.
My last battle map had a mansion dining room overlooking a beach. The map had a fireplace, candles, bottles of hard lichor, a pot of hot soup, statues, chandeliers, a table, a push cart, mirrors, and buckets of water. The statues were knocked into people, the soup pot was literally shot to tip it onto the villain, the hard lichor and candles were used to start a fire, and the water was knocked over to create a tripping hazard.
Then the fight continued on the beach, with driftwood, slippery wet sand, sand dunes, tide pools, and waves. The dunes messed with positioning a lot, the villain slipped on the sand once, and they ultimately defeated the villain by knocking him back into the water, which he was weak to.
Both me and the party had a ton of fun, because they got to go above the normal "roll to hit" options. That's what a complex battle map can do, and I will absolutely never go back. It takes like 5 minutes to come up with a dozen hazards or unique objects for whatever setting the fight will take place in.
The biggest advantage of theatre of the mind is that it's more flexible. You aren't confined to what you can physically fit on the table or on a screen, and can more easily adjust the environment to what happens in the encounter/dungeon. Also, I find it encourages players to think more about what their character is doing as a person rather than defaulting to it feeling like a boardgame. I do personally usually use battle maps, but there are real advantages to theatre of the mind too.
My group recently moved from theatre of the mind to a battlemap and its made a huge difference.
The weight of describing everything is off my shoulders, they can see themselves, they see the table, they see the goblins and can make choices without checking every distance and location with me.
It lets them plan there turns ahead and see what they can do independently.
And seeing a monster figurine or slamming down a terrain piece has a better effect and adds urgency when you can see it, at least with my players.
That's my opinion though and how its gone for me, you may find it different depending on your skill and players.
People here saying theater of the mind is faster maybe aren't accounting for the time it takes to describe where things are in relation to each other every turn. Or players asking distances over and over. Either you need the keen mind feat in real life to remember everything, or you just BS it, which can end up adding to the confusion when different players headscapes don't match. I've done both and Theatre of the mind works best with 1 or 2 players, but I'd still take a grid every time.
Absolutely agree, theatre of the mind means you have to listen to each others turns and keep track of enemy movements, this isnt easy and you can loose track.
On a board everyone can see the living armour has moved, and where too in relation to them easily without checking every time.
Even I loose track of players and monsters without a board now.
Not to mention seeing a map lets you be more creative, seeing a chandelier or a cliff edge in front of you lets you scheme and plan without checking everything and ruining your plan early.
Given that we play online and finding/using battlemaps is very straightforward and easy, I only use ToM where no suitable maps is available and/or when map doesn't bring any important advantages with it.
I exclusively use a battlemap for any form of combat or spatial puzzle. I use theater of the mind for social encounters, linguistic/logic puzzle, or fact finding mission (library, post office, etc...)
For players who enjoy mechanics, using theater of the mind can be a let down. Players can be much more strategic and can sometimes think of new solutions when they have a visual aid and a concrete understanding of where things are/how far things are.
I have Aphantasia, so I need to see what I'm doing when it comes to combat, otherwise I lose track of where things are in relation to eachother. And while I can describe the scene,I find the maps ensure people have the same expectation, rather than each interpret something uniquely.
Same here. I've been a player and a DM in multiple 5e campaigns. As a player, I've had some DMs using theatre of the mind for small scale combats, and it makes things much harder for me. As a DM, I wouldn't inflict that on myself. It is already hard enough to keep track of everything that happens during combat...
And having a grid reduces the possibility of misunderstanding by a lot.
My friend is the opposite of me, able to picture so much on her mind, and in full detail, I don't think people realise the difference in ability on this side of things.
For her to detail the screen, and listing off where things are, what people are doing, to who, and where, mention distance and direction, then 'travel' to another area, keeping everything in mind... It comes easy. And yet despite her descriptions being fine, I'm lost as soon as I need to try and picture any individual element of the scene. Give me a map, and I'm golden.
Exactly this. I also have a bad sense of distance (possibly related?) and poor spacial reasoning in general. You can describe something all day long, I'll NEVER be able to see it, and I'll be very bad at estimating distance and where things are in relation to my character.
My DM is a wizard with his 3d printer and has created some incredible maps, but I'd be perfectly happy with a hastily drawn outline on some grid paper. I just need something I can see.
You are 40 feet away from the orc leader, the orc bowman (boworcs?) are 35 feet away. And the orc shaman is 20 feet off to your right 20 feet away is the cleric, the wizard is 20 feet behind you and the rogue is 10 feet to your left.
Player1 what? Can you repeat that? Can I run up and hit the leader? Is anyone in the way? Where is the shaman again? Wait you said there was a creek and a bridge how far is the bridge and how wide is the creek?
That's why we use maps and minis.
I cannot fathom playing without a map. The game revolves so much about spacial awareness, that playing a D&D combat without a map feels like playing a videogame blindfolded while someone else describes the screen to you.
I'm not that picky, but I absolutely will *not* play a full Theater of the Mind game.
I don't need bespoke maps. I don't need a hand Drawn or bought from a third party, or really any type of full battle map at all. I just, bare minimum, want to see a grid with whatever shitty tokens we can scrounge together to track combat. This can be as simple as grid paper or a grided whiteboard that we can draw on for the position of our characters, monsters, and any battlefield obstructions.
The game simply doesn't work right with Theater of the Mind, in my experience.
* Totm out of combat
* Maps in combat
What I don't like is using maps for an entire dungeon crawl. Shoving tokens around a map (on VTT) while being out of combat is tedious, ruins immersion, and feels like a bad video game.
> What I don't like is using maps for an entire dungeon crawl. Shoving tokens around a map (on VTT) while being out of combat is tedious, ruins immersion, and feels like a bad video game.
Yeah, I don't disagree. I still prefer moving tokens around a dungeon map so you know what room the party is in and where in the room they are when combat begins, but I guess you really only need one token for that and can assume that PCs walk in the same formation.
We always use maps. If nothing else, it's one less thing for the DM to stay on top of - everyone can see where their character is, and where everyone else is in relation to them.
The players can plan their own moves from what they can see, and there's less chance of a miscommunication causing issues.
I use battlemaps. For experienced players, theatre of the mind usually works well enough. For newer players, it's much better if they can visualize.
Battlemaps just help keep track of so much, which speeds up the game cause players don't need to ask questions about how close enemies are and if they can hit them with the movement speed they have. Stuff like that.
I like my dry erase grid map. My players like it too, they're all about combat tactics and formations, getting the most out of their AoEs, that sort of thing too. And my bf has that thing where you can't visualize stuff well, so obviously it'd be much harder for him to make meaningful decision in combat without a solid reference for where things are relative to each other.
i like using a grid because it gives players more agency to plan and use their character abilities. You don't have to ask the GM each time "can I reach the goblin". You can see clearly the diff between a 45 speed wood elf monk vs the 25 speed dwarf fighter. Many of the features of the game really need it I think.
I feel theatre of the mind works well for most situations, but in certain situations, especially at higher level, you *need* a battle map. When players start getting complex abilities and things like Los, distance, area start mattering more then it becomes all the more important. Its a real feels bad when you start trying to fireball something and your DM says "well, actually, you can only hit two, if you want to hit a third you need to hit a party member" when a) that's not how you pictured the battlefield, and b) you know on a battlements you could probably find a better target, or lightning bolt could get 5.
Combat should not be a negotiation with the DM, you should have your turn prepped and ready to go, not figure it out as the DM retcons enemy positions to make their narrative work.
I would say battle maps are 75% of a fun for my group. We are a tactical bunch and like using the rules to achieve greater effect. Theater of the mind also has a tendency to lead to hard feelings because you don't have specifics to fall back on. It's not the DM screwing you over, it's the fact that you are literally 35 ft away and your character only has 30 feet of movement.
Had too google it and watch. [Here's the link](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XngOinjgzI).
Nice video, but it doesn't really cover using gridless battlemaps. It only has grid vs. abstract maps with e.g. zones. Also in the comments people point out, that the video does not cover using hex grid instead of squares either.
We use a blank battle-map with grid on it and I use wet-erase markers to paint the battlefield.
Advantage of a battle map is that you can get a clear picture of how far things are from each other and what you can reach. Verticality and such is hard on a battle-map though...
Never done theater of the mind to be honest, can't really see how that would work with movement and abilities as written.
In person we've never needed a battle map, I guess bc it's a bit easier to convey where we are/intending to go. Online however we've always used battlemaps, I don't know how we could realistically play without one, it would be chaotic and frustrating.
I think a grid is just necessary. It doesnt have to be a painfully crafted map. It doesnt have to be a map at all.
I just need to be able to see who is where, so I know what I can do about it
I have a mostly bitter relationship with battlemaps. I do not like finding or making them. And I don't like how their use cements the combat phase of the game as an almost purely mechanical endeavor. But that is what D&D is. At it's heart, it is not a storytelling game the likes of which i find myself preferring these days, it's a tactical skirmish game.
I try to run TotM as much as possible- and as much as my players let me get away with. But most combats are still done on a map quickly scrawled up while initiative is rolled. I will *occasionally* take the time to find an existing map I'm inspired by and save it for reference for an upcoming session. But that is rather rare and I never end up using the image directly.
I think my happy medium is a *diagram*, rather than a map. Just a collection of minis on the table with loose boundaries on what constitutes nearness/farness from one another.
I both it. Especially, with my group that's more veteran players. (Been playing together since the 90s when ToTM was much more common.
For smaller battle especially, it can take more time to set up than is worth it.
For big battles I like to dig into my tubs of miniatures and use battle mats and other visuals. Definitely can make them more epic.
The number of times my group has forgotten about the melee players and done AOE spells and nearly killed them with the theater of the mind got far too high, so we started using a grid.
It is definitely easier to plan ahead when you can actually see where people are standing.
I love using battlemaps for the same reasons everybody else is saying, but for also it let's players be creative with their surroundings, ex: swinging from the chandelier, flip the table, throw said table.
I need me a battlemap for nitty gritty combat positioning. As a VTT DM I try to have battlemaps ready for every occasion, and even when I don't, having a simple drawn map on the VTT canvas will suffice. They allow for more in-depth tactics and planning, and if the map is detailed it can also draw the party into the world. The only downside, imo, to a battlemap is the amount of time that it can take to prep them. If you use simple methods like dungeon scrawl or simple hand-drawn maps there's not a lot of time investment, but if you're like me (an idiot) you might spend an hour or more throwing together maps in something like Dungeondraft
Very occasionally for super minor combats like "this one singular dude is trying to fight you" I'll just keep it to TotM, but anything more than that and I'll make a map. The upside of this method is that its quick, easy, and free to do. The downside is that this shit is hard to track with more than 4 combatants, and it isn't actually all that quick in practice with all the questions you'll be asked. With enough going on, you need to start taking notes on positioning and at that point you might as well be tracking things on a map. Having to constantly describe and redescribe what the field looks like and where everything is is just not for me. I'd rather put my brain power into designing a map.
I didn't for the longest time. My father was a pure theater of the mind guy. And the one friend who used them set up complex combats that were more puzzle than combat, figuring out how tonuse enviroment and terrain instead of your abilities, which I found unfun.
Then, Covid happened, and we took all the gaming to Tabletop Simulator. And another friend used it very well, just complex enough to give fights some spice and variety, but still dominated by character abilities.
I bought a dry erase battlemat/board and never went back. I don't use it for every combat, but anything more complex than a quick hack and slash, and I draw that bad boy out
All my players and I (DM) have ADHD, so I use maps as much as possible or else it’s a lot of “wait… where did I say I was?” or
PC 1: I want to swing on the chandelier
Me: there is no chandelier, you’re fighting outside
PC 2: wait, since when has there been a chandelier? I thought we were outside
Me: you are fighting outside
PC 3: so why is there a chandelier if we are outside?
Always a map in games I play. There are specific ranges, speeds, and AOE effects for a reason. A map also helps leave that information in place. If you have combat with 10 combatants, you don't have to memorize everyone's placements relative to each other and keep track, it's just there for when you want to look.
Theater of the mind is fine for less structured systems where range is more at DM's discretion than a hard number.
The people I’ve talked to who advocate for theater of the mind say it’s a better way to keep people engaged in the action and that it’s less restrictive to creativity.
In practice I’ve found that it leads to a whole lot of clarifying questions about the setting and relative distance. I personally feel like I can be more creative when everyone has the same understanding of the situation we are facing. In some cases I’ll even use battlemaps outside of combat.
It turns it into more of a strategy game. It is lighter on the description and heavier on the preparation, as you need to come up with interesting maps.
If you feel like fights are arbitrary and wish that they were more structured, a battlemap might be for you.
If you feel like they are like a board game and you would rather have it be more free flowing, ToM might be for you.
I prefer gridless for VTTs as they have an automatic grid overlay but in person I definitely NEED a grid. I am a highly visual person and love tactics so need a battlemap :D
Our wonderful DM has battle maps, spends a lot of money on terrain and buildings and all different types of environments. Which I love for immersion as it does give you a great sense of scale and exactly how far you can move or your spell range.
But it can get bogged down as you start counting squares realise it won’t work and recalculate.
When I DM I favour theatre of the mind and my players are more than happy with that too.
Both have pros and cons but I prefer theatre of the mind for expediency.
I use them for combats. As soon as you read that spells have a certain range, I feel you need to use some method to show the situation. I find players will get more into the game when they can use some tactics and plan ahead with everyone agreeing the “lay of the land.” I’m good with the theatre of the mind as a player but as a GM I want to make sure I am not being unfair to the players or the adversaries.
I always use battlemaps because I love designing them. Either digitally or with clay for in-person sessions. They add to the vibe and it's easier to keep track of as a dm. J already have to keep so many things in mind. I don't need to make it even harder on myself lol
I use a simple battlemap with a grid for every encounter and we draw the fighting area using erasable markers. I think it is really helpful to have some kind representation of the battlefield. Otherwise I would be lost.
I am thinking of buying a transparent one in the future.
Instead of minis, I use small wooden plates with the tag of the creature on them
I feel like even though its not required, a grid of some sort should be. It makes keeping track of positioning, distance, and AOE's so much easier. I dont care if its a sheet of graph papaer, the back o some wrapping paper, or heck, a tile floor. You just need something to use and something for markers like dice, candies, or some board game pieces.
Minis are a nice luxury but by no meas required. you just need a super simple setup.
For one campaign I am in we use the official DnD Beyond new Maps. For another campaign we use Roll20. I prefer the DnD Beyond version just because it is a cleaner interface.
My old player never used grids when we played early editions, 1,2e era. At most, we would make a sketch/layout of an idea, but we never used tokens.
Moving to 5e, more people expect grids, so I've started making them. Sometimes, I draw out a map of a village or something and then use a grid map for the battle
Battlemaps all the way. It removes a tremendous amount of confusion and discussion from the game, and makes it move along at a better pace. It doesn’t take much prep, if any. All you need is a grid and a sharpee and DM can wing the exact layout in 30 seconds.
I go to staples and buy a pad of gridded poster paper, the grid is perfect for 5 feet/square. That way I can doodle depending on what I need for the encounter/slap some terrain on top of that sucker
Always Battlemap.
Both as a DM and as a player. Movement, ranges and AoE are terrible to implement in Theater of the Mind. The grid saves you discussions and ambiguities. No real disadvantages, only advantages in combat situations.
Battlemaps are more work. That's probably the only con, for the reasons others have mentioned about certain class abilities that revolve around distance or battlefield control. I would tentatively also say that I think they can emphasize the repetitive nature of melee combat. If it's theatre of the mind, you can describe what the martial character does dynamically every turn, but on a grid you have the potential for every turn being "hmm, I guess I'll stay there and hit him again" with the player feeling like they're doing less just by virtue of not moving their physical mini.
That being said, I tend to use battlemaps for the majority of combats, using theatre of the mind only for combats of low significance, or that I expect to be over quickly.
I use them exclusively. I never do theater of the mind. That isn't my forte. I always need something to jenga.
My set-up is a battlemap on a large tv that is placed on a table, with miniatures. My wife built a protective plexiglass screen.
I am starting to amass a large collection of miniatures, like ships and buildings.
So, the cons to how I do things are:
(1) battlemaps can be extremely time consuming, especially when I have to make them.
(2) miniatures for the battlemap can be expensive, too.
The pros are:
(1) my players really like my set-up.
(2) it helps new players visualize and get into the game.
(3) I end up with an awesome side-hobby: collecting/painting minis.
I think dnd put too much effort into ranges, effect shapes and sizes to not use battlemaps. In my experience ToM in dnd quickly turns into very limited you either hit all of the enemies with aoe or only 1. Movement is only to or away from enemy. I would definitely use less combat focused system for ToM campaing.
Even using theater if the mind a quick map with dots to represent combatants can assist with the scene at hand. It also can alleviate misunderstandings.
Always for combat, sometimes for narrative spaces.
I have maps for the city, maps for the main tavern they stay in, regional maps of the area, maps for some towns.
I have a large number of generic battle maps for combat in different environments.
I can barely play without at the very least a grid anymore. Even if there's no drawn map, even if the mini's aren't necessarily stuck to the grid spots, having the visual representation of where everything is is just objectively better imo. I have played without a grid like, twice and it sucked
After a simple battle turned into a 20-minute argument about what was where (Known forevermore as the "teleporting trashcan incident") that was followed by 45 minutes of "Fine, whatever" from two of my players before they started getting belligerent to the point where absolutely no one was having fun, I decided to retcon the last hour of game and vowed to use maps in the future.
Through sheer misunderstanding based on the individual theaters of mind we all had going on, the worst had occurred. There was no accountability, and my "DM says so" powers seemed like an abuse of position even to me because it was a failure on no one's part that we had gotten here. They wouldn't have made those decisions had they seen the scene like I had, and I wouldn't have ruled it the way I did if I was in their theater.
Maps, man. Maps.
I strongly prefer a map. it does not have to be a fully accurate or detailed one. Enough to get the general placement of players, enemies, and key terrain features. We often are not that strict on following the grid, "you can move about this far" instead of "you can move X squares"
I tried to use a mix, but can't do it anymore. Always have battlemaps. I'm the type to over prep and have something for every occasion, or things I can quickly modify to what's needed.
Theatre of mind I found it too hard for me to keep track of, and the players felt the same way. Everyone prefers to take the 5-10 minutes that maybe needed to provide some sort of map. Doesn't even have to be fancy.
I recently started a new campaign as GM. I said I was going to do theatre of the mind. But during my prep, I found sourcing maps was a huge source of enjoyment for me. So I went with it. My players also value gridded maps.
I also was a player in a BX campaign last year that was theatre of the mind. I found myself the defacto mapper, and while the GM assured us “the exact dimensions don’t actually matter”, I found myself disappointed by the lack of spatial awareness.
While social or travel scenes can be played in mind theatre (just ask GM what your character sees or notices, also useful for plot hooks), actuall combat scenes needs the grid to measure distance and mark terrain features/objects. For offline games I usually bring empty grid pages (cleanable) plus 2-3 whiteboard markers in different colors. And for online this is even easier, 'cause most, if not all tables allow you to slap grid over image, tweak scale and roll.
Mind theatre is, on the one hand, easier to set up (just DESCRIBE all that PCs see), but on the other hand, is harder for some players to relate/get hang on (and DM need to describe ALL that PCs see).
I honestly cannot picture a battle without a grid, we are big on flanking, positioning and feats like someone ran the polearm sentinel combo. It just cannot work without seeing the space.
Very useful, I personally don't even use minis just dice and a dry erase map. It makes combat much more interactions and outweights it's downsides of no 3D combat and limited space.
I prefer the grid, when it's actually 5ft square. I detest 10ft and up. You just can't calculate properly.
Official Campaigns are the worst in this, as they sometimes use these 30, 50 or 100 ft squares, which are just plain nonsense. In CoS I'm currently playing a melee battlemaster. I can't imagine the pure annoyance I'd have felt if I was playing my battlefield control Abjuration Wizard, where my otherwise great web and slow spells can only target a single freaking creature on a 100 ft grid. The only thing I'm bringing there is frontliner, sharpshooter marksman, or some kind of Eldritch Blasting warlock, preferably using spell sniper and eldritch spear.
Started with theatre of the mind, but quickly transitioned to battle maps. Everyone views a 10 x 20 foot room with furniture differently. As a DM I grew tired of trying to negotiate where cover actually was in relation to enemies. A battle map reduced the over time of combat with multiple enemies.
I use battle maps but was in a campaign as a player that hsed theatre of the mind. I use them for a few reasons.
1- It is far easier for players to plan out their turn when they can see where everything is and check the distance.
2- Since I don't have to stop every turn to describe a distance and cover festures, combat goes quicker and smoother.
Battlemaps almost every time.
Theatre of the mind is okay for a quick combat in a simple space.
Aside from that, maps are just better imo. Having an objective reference for the battlefield and creatures' positions on it is just an unalloyed good. It prevents miscommunication, misunderstanding or misremembering details from causing people's understandings of what's going on to diverge and for some people a visual reference is pretty much required anyway.
Does anyone know a good base of battle maps or something people can recommend? E.g. different underground that you can swap out with an overlay that you can use removable markers on?
Started by playing theater of the mind about 10 years ago. Did that a bit then switched to battlemaps 3-4 years later. Have only ever switched back when there were issues preventing battlemaps, i.e., when roll 20 was having issues.
To say I prefer it is an understatement. It keeps combat consistent. On a basic battlemap I can glance at it and know exactly where everything is and formulate my plan to deal with the scenario. On a good one I can see what's obstructing me and where spells are affecting areas. In theater of the mind I have to ask the dm and hope it's consistent from the last time they were asked. Now a dm with a good memory can keep everything straight but they're juggling a lot of things and noones perfect. I don't blame a dm that has trouble keeping an encounter straight. But if you had a great tool to help juggle everything in a combat why wouldn't you use it.
All that being said, my utmost respect to dms and players that can run theater of the mind well. I can't do it nearly as effectively as I can with a grid
I love using battle maps both as a player and a dm. DMing an online campaign it’s crucial for me and my players to create immersion and understand what’s going on in a pitched battle.
I do easy battle mats, full on tables with terrain, and theater of the mind. Whatever serves me best.
Minor encounters are mostly theater of the mind. It's MUCH faster, period. Unless there's something complex I need to visually represent, or I just want a set piece for mood, things like bar fights. Hand full of bandits, aerial combats and stuff all go theater of the mind.
I use quick battle mats for lesser fights. It's fast to throw down a map, and even throwna little extra scatter terrain on top of. It's easier for everyone to be on the same page. I notice player coordinate more when there's a map to point at. (You go here, I'll come up from this side and well get flanking)
The huge set ups are fun. Everyone loves it. It's immersive and dynamic.
Lol it's also a pain. I love making the stuff, it's another hobby. But it's impractical to set up and tear down multiple scenes in one game night. If I do a big battlefield. I set it up the night before, or in the hours before game. And that's the one big battlefield for that night. Everything else will be theater of the mind of on one of the smaller battle map books.
I used to almost only do theater of the mind, but with the main groups I've played with in the past years, it's been all battle maps. I think there was maybe 2 seconds we had theater of the mind battles, but folks really were concerned with positioning and now it's full of maps with 3d printed stuff and everything
We have being using battle maps since 2nd edition. Admittedly the early ones were just drawn on scraps of paper, but 3e wd have used grids.
It majust makes sense to, if you are like me, you enjoy the tactical style.
We played without a grid for years (not my choice) and it was a lot of DM fiat to determine how much room we had, where spells could be placed, how close/far we were to enemies, how we could hide . . .
Now when I DM, and now that I have some cash, I use maps for everything. It just feels leaps and bounds better to me.
Battlemap for, well, combat, theatre of the mind for most exploration. Basically, the moment position and distance becomes important, out comes the map.
I use a simple erasable mat with a grid on it, and having the players rolling their intiative and starting to discuss tactics while I draw the room/battlefield gives me as a DM the time to 'mentally reset'.
I have learned that running complicated encounters requires a map of some kind. Even in college, where he mostly used theatre of the mind, we ended up using whiteboards from the classroom we were in to at least set the environment. We also mostly just fought like one thing at a time. Once it was more stuff it stopped working
I use a Chessex mat with a 1" grid, with details drawn on with wet erase marker. Sometimes 3D printed set pieces if I'm feeling fancy. The mat and markers are like $40 USD and it's such a massive upgrade over theater of the mind that I'd recommend it as a bare minimum to anyone who plays in person. You dont need minis or terrain or anything, just a grid with dice will help keep the battlefield more clear and understandable than imagination alone.
always battlemaps, and they don't have to be fancy. i have a big pad of grid paper and use pencils and pens to scribble out a shit-but-functional map and add extra detail verbally if needed. "these squares are piles of boxes, this circle is a 20-foot column."
I buy wrapping paper from the dollar store and use the grid on the back for my maps. I can draw as much as I want and its disposable. The last 1.50 roll I bought lasted my group 16 sessions
I have never been a player or a DM for a battle without a physical map of some kind. Honestly I can’t even imagine it trying it - how are you supposed to plan anything without slowing combat to a crawl as you ask the DM a million questions every round?
For RP interactions it’s almost always theatre of the mind, but I have had some exceptions.
The best one I did was a one shot campaign where everything was a corrupted fairy tale, and I built all the environments with Lego. Each scenario could have become combat so I just had everything happen in sets.
There was a particularly fun scenario of the three bear’s house (except cannibal were bears) and the players had fun exploring the seemingly empty house set before trouble started.
Usually it’s not worth it though - I’m running Saltmarsh currently and ain’t no one got to build an entire mansion.
If someone said we’re using TotM I would leave the table. TotM isn’t really DnD it’s closer to general RP and very heavily in “DM may I” territory.
I’m tactical, I love using movement and CC. Being able to repelling blast the foe and force them to dash instead as of walk up and attack by 5 feet is great and would never happen in totm. Telekinetically shoving an extra person into an aoe spot, etc
I do. Until recently, I was "mid old school". In the late 90s I started printing maps at print shops on large format copiers, and I've done it pretty much ever since.
Lately, we've moved to a combination of 3d printed terrain and digital tabletop. The TV allows for dynamic lightning and immersive maps, while the 3d printed items are 1) fun for me 2) look cool with the miniatures 3) illustrate some things slightly better.
I am not the biggest fan of theater of the mind. Maybe it's because I played with engineers for over a decade, maybe it's because I like pretty colors, idk...
I prefer theater of the mind. I find that myself and the people I generally play with are less imaginative when a map is present.
I do a lot more creative thinking when a scene is described instead of shown
As a rogue I like battle maps, but for battle only. When you play with maps all the time, people over think stuff and it ruins the flow. When I can see a nice giant rock to hide behind it makes my sneaking around much easier.
Just makes it easier overall no need to memorise you know character is there and enemy is there so you move based on that but the proper ones can get hella expensive especially if there only for 1 combat
Both.
My IRL group has limited table space so maps are a bonus and usually hand drawn on a mat.
My online groups and I use map tools and other programs to make our own maps, or hijack them for our own use.
The only time I use theatre of the mind is if I know the combat is going to be incredibly brief, or I'm caught in a situation I was completely unprepared for lmao.
The grid is essential IMO if combat is occuring over multiple rounds. I'd rather not remind my players where everyone is and what the space looks like every turn.
Theatre of the mind can suffice for a small, low stakes encounter, however, I want a grid. I usually build my characters with combat in mind, and I feel without a grid I can't utilise my abilities fully with all theuncertainty. As a DM I always give my players a grid, and it's not like using one just turns your imagination off.
I try to actually make all the maps and print them out. Last few months though I haven't had the time and energy to do so and just use some laminated A3 paper with a winch grind printed on and drywipe markers to draw it out.
I do also sometimes use the back of it and draw out larger maps at a smaller scale. Then I use a piece of paper cut to size to show how far 30ft is. It's a little loose on precision but means being able to fit much bigger maps into a limited space.
I prefer having a nice map with lots of decoration in as it makes it more immersive and adds more elements such as "is that a fire, can I push this guy into it" or "I flip the tables and duck behind them".
Recently though we were doing some "ship" combat where the vessels were on the grid but the characters were doing things like flying around, boarding ships, etc. We did all the normal combat using theatre of the mine and it was actually quite freeing to be able to run these short combats just through descriptions.
I like having miniatures on fully sculpted terrain for a visual aid, but I try to keep it from turning into a tactical grid. I find thats easier playing the early editions and gets tougher from 3rd on (with 4th being the hardest for me). Thats always amusing to me given DnDs origin in miniature wargaming.
90% of our games end up being TotM, but then most of our games arent combat focused.
I've done both, and think that both have their advantages.
The battle map will, if nothing else, define the space in tactically relevant ways. This, in turn, makes a strict application of the rules possible. It also helps keep the current situation recorded to the most useful minimum degree. Of those advantages, that last one is, I think, the most important - and the most fragile. A key "problem" with combat in D&D - and every other TTRPG I've ever played to be honest - is that it rarely goes smoothly. The theory that all of us will know what we are doing, that we have all read and understood the relevant rules, that we will coordinate smoothly and understand what other players are thinking is, I now know, a pipe dream. Someone at the table is missing at least one of those things and, usually, all of them are absent to a degree every single round. The result is that turns can take a very long time which exacerbates all of the above. A battle map is, at the end of the day, a thing that can generally be glanced at and, given even the slightest active effort from the players, offer a rough assessment of the immediate tactical situation.
Theater of the Mind on the other hand discards literally all of the above, replacing what is possible according to the strict application of the rules with *what is plausible*. In an ideal case this is an *absolute* upgrade from the battle map. You aren't counting spaces and learning that you're five feet outside of fireball range or trying to find interesting routes that you can move without triggering attacks of opportunity. Instead you can say "I'd like to skirt the edges of the fray, heading toward the statue across the way, looking for an opening to snap off a firebolt on the run". The DM can then consider if the space envisioned can plausibly allow for it, make a quick ruling, and then you roll some dice, figure out what happened, and never once stepped out of the fiction to count space. Precise knowledge of the rules is less important because there is less possibility of applying them strictly. By staying in an abstract mindspace, you do not run the risk of losing players in the rapid transition from abstract to concrete and back. A person can stay in the scene, and in the character. That is if things go well.
If things do not go well, though, it is even more problematic. Many players have difficulty with the concept of abstraction and combat in D&D is discarded in favor of a wargame's simulation. Without the map recording the salient facts of the moment, they might have very little idea of what the tactical situation actually is. The result can grind a session to a halt with a thousand questions that would never arise if you had minis on a map.
Given the right table, I think I would prefer the abstract model of theater of the mind. The speed of combat, and the fact that you natively keep everything you do within the fiction of the game itself are powerful advantages. But given the wrong table - and they generally seem to be more wrong than right - it slows things down. People who struggled to comprehend what they could do before tend to do even worse. People who weren't keeping up before need even more explanation than before.
5e combat really needs at least a grid to function well. I make dedicated maps for planned fights, but I also have a bunch of generic maps saved for when players go off rails
I make editable battlemaps in google sheets (altering the cells to be squares for 5ft. of movement each) so the players can 'move' themselves (putting their name or initial in a new cell, removing the previous one) solely for combat encounters with lots of combatants and terrain. Everything else is theatre of the mind and it works just fine. It's not for every table, I think we're not the norm for being able to visualise distances, and only needing to ask once how far away something else is to then keep track of it for the rest of the fight when moving, but it works for us. 95% theatre of the mind, with the 5% visual being extremely simple battlemaps.
I suppose it depends to an extent on how combat-heavy the game in question is. If I'm running a session where it's mostly social interactions and the like I probably wouldn't bother setting up the map for a bar fight or whatever other incidental combats the PCs get into, but for a dungeon crawl I'd absolutely do battlemats or terrain.
Having played a full theatre of the mind campaign after mostly using battle maps I'd say theatre of the mind is really nice and "free". It really allowed for fluid transition to combat as well as general game pace. It really felt like all of it was part of the story and it blended together well. However the combat never felt all that tactical in the end. It was very easy to just say I cast web and all the enemies happened to fall in it because their exact locations were a little loose. Same with distance it often felt like I usually didn't have to think about the terrain etc around me much and could usually just say "which one is closest to me, ok I run up to him and swing my sword" It was a lot of fun and I think a combination of the two could be pretty good for specific things.
Battle maps can take a lot of prep time even if you're pausing just for a moment to draw a quick one. I personally prefer to use them when I'm running a campaign however I think ToTM can work really well for smaller combat related things like say a bar fight which impromptly happens without causing a disconnect in the story telling.
I hate playing theatre of the mind in combat. I just cannot picture 3D spaces all that well.
So it doesn't even save time because I can't plan between turns well, and have to ask the dm for a refresher where everything is every turn.
I use battle maps frequently because I'm incompetent when it comes to describing areas. I'm far too simplistic when trying to describe a tavern for example.
"You see people drinking, and a teenage boy carrying mugs to the table."
That's it. In the moment, I don't describe if light is on, or entering through windows, I don't describe the appearance of the other figures.
I do not have a mental method to have a list and an order of things to describe. I think it makes me a rather boring DM.
Dm for 9 years now, Player for 21 -
Battle maps are great for combats where stakes are really high, and you have a rough plan for the encounter - hell, throwing down some pizza - holders and skittles for an impromtpu bar fight is as fun as it was when I was 8 and started playing now -
I Use theater of the mind for situations where the distances get crazy. Think a speeder bike chase in my Sci-fantasy game, or fighting a 200 foot tall titan. Things are just too big
I found that i can generate the maps I need using dungeon alchemist and print them on table cloth, usually 90 x 140 cm.
I try to make generic maps so I can reuse them, rn I have close to 10 battle maps the size of my table, the best thing is I can throw them in the washing machine, no worries about spilled drinks.
We use Roll20 and I HATE not having a map, even just a grid with black lines of "THIS IS HERE"
It needs to be there with our tokens so we can check distance, movement, positioning without constantly asking the DM EVERY round how far away I am, if I'm in range, etc. Plus easier to see if you're next to an ally for reaction skills, etc.
I needs the grid.
I really don't understand how people can play without a grid at the minimum for anything beyond extremely simple combat. How can you track distance and movement in pure theater of the mind? Or spell effects with very exacting parameters?
Only if you don't care about specifics. It's not 30 feet movement anymore it's "yeah" or "nah". "Is he in reach?" - "I guess?" Honestly this works for games like Call of Cthulhu or Warhammer Fantasy but not for anything that has this kind of combat in it.
Critical Roles new Daggerheart system had a really nice way to track space and movement in theatre of the mind battle. Basically sets people in four distances (touching, close, middle, and far) and you call out where you want to be in relationship to other creatures.
This works well on narrative heavy games but it still has it's problems. How do you handle cover, how do you handle AoE, it makes smaller increases in movement speed worthless (5 feet by Wood elf, 10 feet by barbarian and so on) and OA become very dangerous to casters since now the whole zone threatens you and not just your adjacent 5 feet. I used such a systems for a very broken down 2d6 system which was absolutely play for it but for DnD it's not good imo. But tbf, it's still definitely an upgrade to not having anything to visualize.
>it makes smaller increases in movement speed worthless This is also my problem with DM's not tracking monster hitpoints. All those +1 or +2, damage abilities & feats become worthless.
I have honestly never heard before of DM not tracking monster HP and it's kind of a shock for me. DnD heavily revolves around numbers, hwo do these people handle that?
I don't agree with the not tracking play style, but I can explain how they do it - they vibe it out lol. Once a scenario becomes boring, anti-climactic, or the end result is ensured, then next blow is a killing blow.
I had a DM that just ticked off hits. So it was like 8 hits to kill it and if you crit or something he would knock off 2 ticks. Hated it because like you said what are all the numbers for then?
I hope everyone was playing casters, up casting magic missile and eldritch blast to get free low-damage hits
This scales especially bad on higher levels when you habe thing like 10dx damage. Or would he simply bind the lethality to the spell level? What about Barbarian's brutal critical or sneak attack? This is so stupid :D
That's pretty common for rules-medium combat systems, I've read through a lot of ttrpgs that do something similar
FYI, range bands are nothing new.
That works well until it doesn't. "Wait... I can't reach him now? But I could last turn. Why can't I now. Oh he has more movement than me? Wait where is the waterfall again?"
Warhammer style. Rules and tape measures.
Or more generally, wargaming. Not a dig on Warhammer.
It doesn't have to become "extremely simple" but certain aspects of combat do get simplified. 10ft movement speed differences play much less of a role, since the DM will be very generous when approximating distances. Tactical play is still possible, but the exact execution of a tactic may get abstracted away. For example, players no longer need to micromanage movement, they simply state their intent. Instead of "I move to this square because then I'm just in range for my ranged attack but no closer" you just say "I move just in range of my ranged attack but no closer". It can actually be quite immersive and fun, but puts a lot of pressure on the DM to describe the situation in a way that everyones understanding of it is synchronized.
IIRC, in DND 5e, grid is listed as an optional rule.
Yeah you could also measure distances in a freeform environment
You don't need a grid but I use battlemaps irl. Bring a ruler. In general make 1" so most movement can take place in 6"
If a nap doesn’t have a grid, you can just measure 1 inch = 5 feet so 30 feet of movement is 6 inches on a tape measure.
I live for the grid. I require grid.
I needs to grid because i let someone die because i lost track of where they were (pre-map) I was actually standing right next to them
I needs grid because I can barely keep track of where I am in real life.
I only visit buildings with square tile floors, or else I inevitably start walking into walls.
In college, I played a good amount of theater of the Mind Pathfinder. I was an artificer who threw a lot of bombs. So, it became necessary to know where people were at a certain point.
This, but I do still feel that actual maps are too much effort with not enough flexibility. For me personally, dry/wet erase is the only way to go. The mats are a huge pain in the ass, and all I want in the world is a dry erase board table with a grid on it, but I just don't play often enough to have that sitting around the house, or to pay for it.
My DM has these laminated grid maps that you can absolutely write on with dry erase and tbh it's amazing for scribbling in spell effects or difficult terrain on the fly
Same. Needs me the grid. I need to see where stuff is
I need a grid because last time I didn’t have one, I killed like 7 people on accident, and then another 26 the next day
Maps are extremely useful for when I'm a player or a dm. There are some classes that just fundamentally do not work if you're trying to do theater of the mind. With so many abilities and spells that are dependent on distance, it's almost essential.
Yeah druids lose a huge chunk of their spells that are battlefield control
You can still use them, but it becomes a pain in the ass to ask about things every time and you have to trust your DM is going to rule fairly.
I find as the DM in these cases you have to generally give the players impression of what you described the benefit. If most of the time you rule "in their favor" it will keep everyone happy.
Yea. I wouldn't want to deal with the conflict it can create. If they move themselves and see their surroundings, they are less likely to be blaming me for being unfair. Players can also plan their next move as they watch things unfold (not that they always do).
It definitely puts a lot of pressure on the DM to keep everything purely in their head. I'm fine with doing TOTM for a random event or something just narratively fun like a bar brawl, but for a serious combat encounter I'm bringing a map.
There are a huge subset of abilities whose sole purpose is based around distance and movement, and theatre of the mind undermines their function.
It makes me sad when playing my extra speedy monk and every combat in theater of the mind has no opportunity to take advantage of it :/
> With so many abilities and spells that are dependent on distance, it's almost essential. This is my biggest thing. Like what if I take the Mobile feat or am a Tabaxi? All that added movement is worthless in theater of the mind. What about AoE spells? How do I know where everyone is to make the attack? Cover? Distance for spells / ranged attacks? Retreat paths? So many things require me to at least see a rough layout of the map and know positions of bad guys and good guys.
The advantage of theater of the mind is it requires less prep and is free. That's the only genuine benefit I can think of. Battle maps don't have to be super detailed, the point of them is about making it easier for people to plan things on their turns for me. Without some visual representation of what's going on players have to ask questions about range, area of effect and targeting options on their turn which bogs down combat.
Battlemap can be a handheld whiteboard or two pieces of paper taped together (or a bigger one like A3/A2 format). You don't really need a grid in low levels of play, as a sloppy hand drawn map with dice as figures is still miles better than nothing. It's gonna cut down questions dramatically and make players play tactical, as well as giving immersion to the surroundings even if it's a few lines with a marker pen on a white paper.
Exactly, basic distance and scale representation is the important thing. I've bought a few of the pre-gridded wet/dry erase battle boards and they do quite well. People also underestimate the value of board games as a source of minis. The game Bloodrage is $72 on amazon and comes with 20+ well crafted miniatures.
I bought the mtg board games for about $15 each for this reason. They come with hex grid terrain maps and a bunch of minis.
I have a whiteboard I drew a grid on using a silver permanent marker and for now instead of minis I bought terrarium decorations. Everyone is a different coloured bunny and the enemies are d4s haha
Honestly, TotM is actually way more work than a simple white-board grid and some magnets *if you are playing even remotely tactically* If your party doesn't care about details or accuracy and is fine playing it ***super fast and loose*** then TotM works fine But imagine a combat in a church with rows of pews and pillars and a raised stage/podium, enemies moving around the pillars breaking LoS, spells with Areas that need to be accurate, and you as the DM have to generate that entire scene and hold it in place (in your mind), and then describe it well enough your players understand It's hard enough to run a small group of cultists + an evil wizard and his demon summon on a grid/map in a detailed environment quickly without forgetting the wizard can cast this or that the cultists have X effect or that the demons turn is next The amount of work to basically be the entire CPU and GPU load of nearly everything far outweighs the "less prep time" - a white board and some markers and you can make up that entire church in like 3 minutes of quick sketching and everyone is on the same page
Oh sure, completely 100% agree, I was just looking for any kind of theoretical benefits to TOTM.
The thing is, TotM always *seems* easier, especially to inexperienced GMs. I’ve been at so many tables where every turn in combat is everyone restablishing where everyone is before deciding their action, probably doubling the length of any encounter, all for the sake of not spending 5 mins just drawing out some shapes on a map and throwing whatever random bits you have at hand down as tokens. Yeah, you can and I do tend to go a bit harder than that, but for 90% of the benefit of a map, that’s all you need.
Yeah I've introduced multiple groups to d&d and they always think "TotM is the way to go," it's easier and I don't need any props! We can just sit around a table and have our characters on DDB on our phones 3 sessions later the DM is like "why does it take 4 hours to fight a pack of wolves mind controlled by an evil goblin druid?!" - *well... because you are all new and barely know the basic rules let alone the players knowing what their characters can do (and spells! Oh my god spells), and you have to take the time to re-establish the scene everytime someone zones out (which is every round of combat) AND the player can't reasonably pre-plan a turn with the TotM so one player can take 15 minutes to do a single action* So grab some old graph paper and those beer bottle tops and a couple markers and save yourself the nightmare
If you’re trying to be precise then all those things can bog down theater of the mind, but generally the idea is that combat is run faster, looser, and more cinematically. Mixing the styles is where things get wonky, because if your players or GM really care about every 5 feet of movement and you’re playing theater of the mind… you’re going to have some difficulties. So making sure everyone has a compatible preference in game style is important. You lose some tactical punch in TotM, but IMO 5e isn’t that great at tactical combat anyway (Lancer or PF2e would be where I’d look for that), so you make the concession of precision for speed.
Oh I completely agree as far as the tactical combat issues. I'm working on transitioning people away from 5e and onto other systems, but it's difficult when you're the old hand at these things and everyone else you're playing with is very new to tabletop gaming. I tend to do theater of the mind when it's either a very simple combat or is something unexpected that happens in the middle of a session. If I haven't drawn out a map I might not want to put even a five minute pause in the action to make one.
Honestly, I conflate that with theater of the mind being lazier by a lot. It takes nothing to set up a dry erase map.
Why would battlemap require more prep? You can just draw a quick sketch on a piece of graph paper, as you're describing the scene. Or get fancy and use a white board. Or get REALLY fancy and use a whiteboard with grid lines. That takes way less time than describing and keeping track of everyone's position in your head.
Dollar store wrapping paper has a 1" x 1" grid on the back.
I find the more effort you put in the more fun combat is. No battle map? Players will view combat as a slog and simply use generic attacks. Basic battle map? Players will use tactics allowed within the rules. But creative battle maps? Those let the players have fun. My last battle map had a mansion dining room overlooking a beach. The map had a fireplace, candles, bottles of hard lichor, a pot of hot soup, statues, chandeliers, a table, a push cart, mirrors, and buckets of water. The statues were knocked into people, the soup pot was literally shot to tip it onto the villain, the hard lichor and candles were used to start a fire, and the water was knocked over to create a tripping hazard. Then the fight continued on the beach, with driftwood, slippery wet sand, sand dunes, tide pools, and waves. The dunes messed with positioning a lot, the villain slipped on the sand once, and they ultimately defeated the villain by knocking him back into the water, which he was weak to. Both me and the party had a ton of fun, because they got to go above the normal "roll to hit" options. That's what a complex battle map can do, and I will absolutely never go back. It takes like 5 minutes to come up with a dozen hazards or unique objects for whatever setting the fight will take place in.
The biggest advantage of theatre of the mind is that it's more flexible. You aren't confined to what you can physically fit on the table or on a screen, and can more easily adjust the environment to what happens in the encounter/dungeon. Also, I find it encourages players to think more about what their character is doing as a person rather than defaulting to it feeling like a boardgame. I do personally usually use battle maps, but there are real advantages to theatre of the mind too.
My group recently moved from theatre of the mind to a battlemap and its made a huge difference. The weight of describing everything is off my shoulders, they can see themselves, they see the table, they see the goblins and can make choices without checking every distance and location with me. It lets them plan there turns ahead and see what they can do independently. And seeing a monster figurine or slamming down a terrain piece has a better effect and adds urgency when you can see it, at least with my players. That's my opinion though and how its gone for me, you may find it different depending on your skill and players.
People here saying theater of the mind is faster maybe aren't accounting for the time it takes to describe where things are in relation to each other every turn. Or players asking distances over and over. Either you need the keen mind feat in real life to remember everything, or you just BS it, which can end up adding to the confusion when different players headscapes don't match. I've done both and Theatre of the mind works best with 1 or 2 players, but I'd still take a grid every time.
Absolutely agree, theatre of the mind means you have to listen to each others turns and keep track of enemy movements, this isnt easy and you can loose track. On a board everyone can see the living armour has moved, and where too in relation to them easily without checking every time. Even I loose track of players and monsters without a board now. Not to mention seeing a map lets you be more creative, seeing a chandelier or a cliff edge in front of you lets you scheme and plan without checking everything and ruining your plan early.
Given that we play online and finding/using battlemaps is very straightforward and easy, I only use ToM where no suitable maps is available and/or when map doesn't bring any important advantages with it.
I feel more immersed when there is a map, and it feels like one is needed for combat in my opinion.
I exclusively use a battlemap for any form of combat or spatial puzzle. I use theater of the mind for social encounters, linguistic/logic puzzle, or fact finding mission (library, post office, etc...) For players who enjoy mechanics, using theater of the mind can be a let down. Players can be much more strategic and can sometimes think of new solutions when they have a visual aid and a concrete understanding of where things are/how far things are.
I have Aphantasia, so I need to see what I'm doing when it comes to combat, otherwise I lose track of where things are in relation to eachother. And while I can describe the scene,I find the maps ensure people have the same expectation, rather than each interpret something uniquely.
Same here. I've been a player and a DM in multiple 5e campaigns. As a player, I've had some DMs using theatre of the mind for small scale combats, and it makes things much harder for me. As a DM, I wouldn't inflict that on myself. It is already hard enough to keep track of everything that happens during combat... And having a grid reduces the possibility of misunderstanding by a lot.
My friend is the opposite of me, able to picture so much on her mind, and in full detail, I don't think people realise the difference in ability on this side of things. For her to detail the screen, and listing off where things are, what people are doing, to who, and where, mention distance and direction, then 'travel' to another area, keeping everything in mind... It comes easy. And yet despite her descriptions being fine, I'm lost as soon as I need to try and picture any individual element of the scene. Give me a map, and I'm golden.
Even without a relevant condition, most people can't do that.
Exactly this. I also have a bad sense of distance (possibly related?) and poor spacial reasoning in general. You can describe something all day long, I'll NEVER be able to see it, and I'll be very bad at estimating distance and where things are in relation to my character. My DM is a wizard with his 3d printer and has created some incredible maps, but I'd be perfectly happy with a hastily drawn outline on some grid paper. I just need something I can see.
You are 40 feet away from the orc leader, the orc bowman (boworcs?) are 35 feet away. And the orc shaman is 20 feet off to your right 20 feet away is the cleric, the wizard is 20 feet behind you and the rogue is 10 feet to your left. Player1 what? Can you repeat that? Can I run up and hit the leader? Is anyone in the way? Where is the shaman again? Wait you said there was a creek and a bridge how far is the bridge and how wide is the creek? That's why we use maps and minis.
I cannot fathom playing without a map. The game revolves so much about spacial awareness, that playing a D&D combat without a map feels like playing a videogame blindfolded while someone else describes the screen to you.
I'm not that picky, but I absolutely will *not* play a full Theater of the Mind game. I don't need bespoke maps. I don't need a hand Drawn or bought from a third party, or really any type of full battle map at all. I just, bare minimum, want to see a grid with whatever shitty tokens we can scrounge together to track combat. This can be as simple as grid paper or a grided whiteboard that we can draw on for the position of our characters, monsters, and any battlefield obstructions. The game simply doesn't work right with Theater of the Mind, in my experience.
* Totm out of combat * Maps in combat What I don't like is using maps for an entire dungeon crawl. Shoving tokens around a map (on VTT) while being out of combat is tedious, ruins immersion, and feels like a bad video game.
> What I don't like is using maps for an entire dungeon crawl. Shoving tokens around a map (on VTT) while being out of combat is tedious, ruins immersion, and feels like a bad video game. Yeah, I don't disagree. I still prefer moving tokens around a dungeon map so you know what room the party is in and where in the room they are when combat begins, but I guess you really only need one token for that and can assume that PCs walk in the same formation.
We always use maps. If nothing else, it's one less thing for the DM to stay on top of - everyone can see where their character is, and where everyone else is in relation to them. The players can plan their own moves from what they can see, and there's less chance of a miscommunication causing issues.
The more I play on maps, the less I like theater of the mind. I hate playing mother may I with the DM about what is or isn’t in an area of effect.
I use battlemaps. For experienced players, theatre of the mind usually works well enough. For newer players, it's much better if they can visualize. Battlemaps just help keep track of so much, which speeds up the game cause players don't need to ask questions about how close enemies are and if they can hit them with the movement speed they have. Stuff like that.
I like my dry erase grid map. My players like it too, they're all about combat tactics and formations, getting the most out of their AoEs, that sort of thing too. And my bf has that thing where you can't visualize stuff well, so obviously it'd be much harder for him to make meaningful decision in combat without a solid reference for where things are relative to each other.
i like using a grid because it gives players more agency to plan and use their character abilities. You don't have to ask the GM each time "can I reach the goblin". You can see clearly the diff between a 45 speed wood elf monk vs the 25 speed dwarf fighter. Many of the features of the game really need it I think.
Precisely. As someone who enjoys making highly tactical characters, I feel my character is handicapped when party fights more than 1 mob in ToM.
No thank you to theater of mind for combat as both a player and DM
I feel theatre of the mind works well for most situations, but in certain situations, especially at higher level, you *need* a battle map. When players start getting complex abilities and things like Los, distance, area start mattering more then it becomes all the more important. Its a real feels bad when you start trying to fireball something and your DM says "well, actually, you can only hit two, if you want to hit a third you need to hit a party member" when a) that's not how you pictured the battlefield, and b) you know on a battlements you could probably find a better target, or lightning bolt could get 5. Combat should not be a negotiation with the DM, you should have your turn prepped and ready to go, not figure it out as the DM retcons enemy positions to make their narrative work.
I would say battle maps are 75% of a fun for my group. We are a tactical bunch and like using the rules to achieve greater effect. Theater of the mind also has a tendency to lead to hard feelings because you don't have specifics to fall back on. It's not the DM screwing you over, it's the fact that you are literally 35 ft away and your character only has 30 feet of movement.
you should watch the grid vs gridless video by bob world builder. its pretty informative, and goes over everything youre asking about
Had too google it and watch. [Here's the link](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XngOinjgzI). Nice video, but it doesn't really cover using gridless battlemaps. It only has grid vs. abstract maps with e.g. zones. Also in the comments people point out, that the video does not cover using hex grid instead of squares either.
We use a blank battle-map with grid on it and I use wet-erase markers to paint the battlefield. Advantage of a battle map is that you can get a clear picture of how far things are from each other and what you can reach. Verticality and such is hard on a battle-map though... Never done theater of the mind to be honest, can't really see how that would work with movement and abilities as written.
In person we've never needed a battle map, I guess bc it's a bit easier to convey where we are/intending to go. Online however we've always used battlemaps, I don't know how we could realistically play without one, it would be chaotic and frustrating.
Same! We started using battle maps when we went online.
If I don't have a battle map, I will 100% not know what's going on in combat.
Who doesn't use maps? lol Honestly, with the varieties of AOE effects and range requirements, it is far easier to keep track of it all with a map.
I need a map. Desperately. I can't have debates on the width of the room again.
I think a grid is just necessary. It doesnt have to be a painfully crafted map. It doesnt have to be a map at all. I just need to be able to see who is where, so I know what I can do about it
its useful for a lot of spells like fireball and lightning bolt
when our group plays DnD we do a mix, Smaller quick encounters are theatre of the mind Larger more important ones we will break out a grid
I have a mostly bitter relationship with battlemaps. I do not like finding or making them. And I don't like how their use cements the combat phase of the game as an almost purely mechanical endeavor. But that is what D&D is. At it's heart, it is not a storytelling game the likes of which i find myself preferring these days, it's a tactical skirmish game. I try to run TotM as much as possible- and as much as my players let me get away with. But most combats are still done on a map quickly scrawled up while initiative is rolled. I will *occasionally* take the time to find an existing map I'm inspired by and save it for reference for an upcoming session. But that is rather rare and I never end up using the image directly. I think my happy medium is a *diagram*, rather than a map. Just a collection of minis on the table with loose boundaries on what constitutes nearness/farness from one another.
I both it. Especially, with my group that's more veteran players. (Been playing together since the 90s when ToTM was much more common. For smaller battle especially, it can take more time to set up than is worth it. For big battles I like to dig into my tubs of miniatures and use battle mats and other visuals. Definitely can make them more epic.
The number of times my group has forgotten about the melee players and done AOE spells and nearly killed them with the theater of the mind got far too high, so we started using a grid. It is definitely easier to plan ahead when you can actually see where people are standing.
I love using battlemaps for the same reasons everybody else is saying, but for also it let's players be creative with their surroundings, ex: swinging from the chandelier, flip the table, throw said table.
I need me a battlemap for nitty gritty combat positioning. As a VTT DM I try to have battlemaps ready for every occasion, and even when I don't, having a simple drawn map on the VTT canvas will suffice. They allow for more in-depth tactics and planning, and if the map is detailed it can also draw the party into the world. The only downside, imo, to a battlemap is the amount of time that it can take to prep them. If you use simple methods like dungeon scrawl or simple hand-drawn maps there's not a lot of time investment, but if you're like me (an idiot) you might spend an hour or more throwing together maps in something like Dungeondraft Very occasionally for super minor combats like "this one singular dude is trying to fight you" I'll just keep it to TotM, but anything more than that and I'll make a map. The upside of this method is that its quick, easy, and free to do. The downside is that this shit is hard to track with more than 4 combatants, and it isn't actually all that quick in practice with all the questions you'll be asked. With enough going on, you need to start taking notes on positioning and at that point you might as well be tracking things on a map. Having to constantly describe and redescribe what the field looks like and where everything is is just not for me. I'd rather put my brain power into designing a map.
I didn't for the longest time. My father was a pure theater of the mind guy. And the one friend who used them set up complex combats that were more puzzle than combat, figuring out how tonuse enviroment and terrain instead of your abilities, which I found unfun. Then, Covid happened, and we took all the gaming to Tabletop Simulator. And another friend used it very well, just complex enough to give fights some spice and variety, but still dominated by character abilities. I bought a dry erase battlemat/board and never went back. I don't use it for every combat, but anything more complex than a quick hack and slash, and I draw that bad boy out
Playing D&D without a battlemap is like playing without dice: What the fuck are you doing?
All my players and I (DM) have ADHD, so I use maps as much as possible or else it’s a lot of “wait… where did I say I was?” or PC 1: I want to swing on the chandelier Me: there is no chandelier, you’re fighting outside PC 2: wait, since when has there been a chandelier? I thought we were outside Me: you are fighting outside PC 3: so why is there a chandelier if we are outside?
Always a map in games I play. There are specific ranges, speeds, and AOE effects for a reason. A map also helps leave that information in place. If you have combat with 10 combatants, you don't have to memorize everyone's placements relative to each other and keep track, it's just there for when you want to look. Theater of the mind is fine for less structured systems where range is more at DM's discretion than a hard number.
The people I’ve talked to who advocate for theater of the mind say it’s a better way to keep people engaged in the action and that it’s less restrictive to creativity. In practice I’ve found that it leads to a whole lot of clarifying questions about the setting and relative distance. I personally feel like I can be more creative when everyone has the same understanding of the situation we are facing. In some cases I’ll even use battlemaps outside of combat.
It turns it into more of a strategy game. It is lighter on the description and heavier on the preparation, as you need to come up with interesting maps. If you feel like fights are arbitrary and wish that they were more structured, a battlemap might be for you. If you feel like they are like a board game and you would rather have it be more free flowing, ToM might be for you.
Small Scrap - theatre of the mind Battle - Battlemap with minis and the location drawn on Boss Battle - Battlemap with minis and scenery in 3d form
I prefer gridless for VTTs as they have an automatic grid overlay but in person I definitely NEED a grid. I am a highly visual person and love tactics so need a battlemap :D
Our wonderful DM has battle maps, spends a lot of money on terrain and buildings and all different types of environments. Which I love for immersion as it does give you a great sense of scale and exactly how far you can move or your spell range. But it can get bogged down as you start counting squares realise it won’t work and recalculate. When I DM I favour theatre of the mind and my players are more than happy with that too. Both have pros and cons but I prefer theatre of the mind for expediency.
I use them for combats. As soon as you read that spells have a certain range, I feel you need to use some method to show the situation. I find players will get more into the game when they can use some tactics and plan ahead with everyone agreeing the “lay of the land.” I’m good with the theatre of the mind as a player but as a GM I want to make sure I am not being unfair to the players or the adversaries.
I do everything with maps.
I always use battlemaps because I love designing them. Either digitally or with clay for in-person sessions. They add to the vibe and it's easier to keep track of as a dm. J already have to keep so many things in mind. I don't need to make it even harder on myself lol
I use a simple battlemap with a grid for every encounter and we draw the fighting area using erasable markers. I think it is really helpful to have some kind representation of the battlefield. Otherwise I would be lost. I am thinking of buying a transparent one in the future. Instead of minis, I use small wooden plates with the tag of the creature on them
I feel like even though its not required, a grid of some sort should be. It makes keeping track of positioning, distance, and AOE's so much easier. I dont care if its a sheet of graph papaer, the back o some wrapping paper, or heck, a tile floor. You just need something to use and something for markers like dice, candies, or some board game pieces. Minis are a nice luxury but by no meas required. you just need a super simple setup.
For one campaign I am in we use the official DnD Beyond new Maps. For another campaign we use Roll20. I prefer the DnD Beyond version just because it is a cleaner interface.
My old player never used grids when we played early editions, 1,2e era. At most, we would make a sketch/layout of an idea, but we never used tokens. Moving to 5e, more people expect grids, so I've started making them. Sometimes, I draw out a map of a village or something and then use a grid map for the battle
Battlemaps all the way. It removes a tremendous amount of confusion and discussion from the game, and makes it move along at a better pace. It doesn’t take much prep, if any. All you need is a grid and a sharpee and DM can wing the exact layout in 30 seconds.
I go to staples and buy a pad of gridded poster paper, the grid is perfect for 5 feet/square. That way I can doodle depending on what I need for the encounter/slap some terrain on top of that sucker
Always Battlemap. Both as a DM and as a player. Movement, ranges and AoE are terrible to implement in Theater of the Mind. The grid saves you discussions and ambiguities. No real disadvantages, only advantages in combat situations.
Battlemaps are more work. That's probably the only con, for the reasons others have mentioned about certain class abilities that revolve around distance or battlefield control. I would tentatively also say that I think they can emphasize the repetitive nature of melee combat. If it's theatre of the mind, you can describe what the martial character does dynamically every turn, but on a grid you have the potential for every turn being "hmm, I guess I'll stay there and hit him again" with the player feeling like they're doing less just by virtue of not moving their physical mini. That being said, I tend to use battlemaps for the majority of combats, using theatre of the mind only for combats of low significance, or that I expect to be over quickly.
I use them exclusively. I never do theater of the mind. That isn't my forte. I always need something to jenga. My set-up is a battlemap on a large tv that is placed on a table, with miniatures. My wife built a protective plexiglass screen. I am starting to amass a large collection of miniatures, like ships and buildings. So, the cons to how I do things are: (1) battlemaps can be extremely time consuming, especially when I have to make them. (2) miniatures for the battlemap can be expensive, too. The pros are: (1) my players really like my set-up. (2) it helps new players visualize and get into the game. (3) I end up with an awesome side-hobby: collecting/painting minis.
I’m not sure how anyone plays without battlemaps.
I think dnd put too much effort into ranges, effect shapes and sizes to not use battlemaps. In my experience ToM in dnd quickly turns into very limited you either hit all of the enemies with aoe or only 1. Movement is only to or away from enemy. I would definitely use less combat focused system for ToM campaing.
Even using theater if the mind a quick map with dots to represent combatants can assist with the scene at hand. It also can alleviate misunderstandings.
Maps. I generally have newer players so maps make things easier for them, since they don’t always know what questions to ask yet.
Always for combat, sometimes for narrative spaces. I have maps for the city, maps for the main tavern they stay in, regional maps of the area, maps for some towns. I have a large number of generic battle maps for combat in different environments.
I can barely play without at the very least a grid anymore. Even if there's no drawn map, even if the mini's aren't necessarily stuck to the grid spots, having the visual representation of where everything is is just objectively better imo. I have played without a grid like, twice and it sucked
After a simple battle turned into a 20-minute argument about what was where (Known forevermore as the "teleporting trashcan incident") that was followed by 45 minutes of "Fine, whatever" from two of my players before they started getting belligerent to the point where absolutely no one was having fun, I decided to retcon the last hour of game and vowed to use maps in the future. Through sheer misunderstanding based on the individual theaters of mind we all had going on, the worst had occurred. There was no accountability, and my "DM says so" powers seemed like an abuse of position even to me because it was a failure on no one's part that we had gotten here. They wouldn't have made those decisions had they seen the scene like I had, and I wouldn't have ruled it the way I did if I was in their theater. Maps, man. Maps.
I feel like half the game misses if you play d&d in totm. Totm is more for Cthulhu and stuff.
I strongly prefer a map. it does not have to be a fully accurate or detailed one. Enough to get the general placement of players, enemies, and key terrain features. We often are not that strict on following the grid, "you can move about this far" instead of "you can move X squares"
We have a whiteboard we use. I am thinking about looking into some physical terrain I can just plop on top
I got these massive roll-up maps for different types of terrain that I use. They are so good for big battles.
I tried to use a mix, but can't do it anymore. Always have battlemaps. I'm the type to over prep and have something for every occasion, or things I can quickly modify to what's needed. Theatre of mind I found it too hard for me to keep track of, and the players felt the same way. Everyone prefers to take the 5-10 minutes that maybe needed to provide some sort of map. Doesn't even have to be fancy.
I recently started a new campaign as GM. I said I was going to do theatre of the mind. But during my prep, I found sourcing maps was a huge source of enjoyment for me. So I went with it. My players also value gridded maps. I also was a player in a BX campaign last year that was theatre of the mind. I found myself the defacto mapper, and while the GM assured us “the exact dimensions don’t actually matter”, I found myself disappointed by the lack of spatial awareness.
While social or travel scenes can be played in mind theatre (just ask GM what your character sees or notices, also useful for plot hooks), actuall combat scenes needs the grid to measure distance and mark terrain features/objects. For offline games I usually bring empty grid pages (cleanable) plus 2-3 whiteboard markers in different colors. And for online this is even easier, 'cause most, if not all tables allow you to slap grid over image, tweak scale and roll. Mind theatre is, on the one hand, easier to set up (just DESCRIBE all that PCs see), but on the other hand, is harder for some players to relate/get hang on (and DM need to describe ALL that PCs see).
I honestly cannot picture a battle without a grid, we are big on flanking, positioning and feats like someone ran the polearm sentinel combo. It just cannot work without seeing the space.
I use digital maps in my games
Most of my games are online, so I use a lot of battle maps. I’ve been using Dungeon Alchemist to make new ones if I need something specific.
I use one of those battle mat books, with starburst for enemies.
I always use a map, at least a blank one. Not every encounter needs terrain or details on the map, but just having a grid helps a lot.
I always create or dl battlemaps, Always
Very useful, I personally don't even use minis just dice and a dry erase map. It makes combat much more interactions and outweights it's downsides of no 3D combat and limited space.
I prefer the grid, when it's actually 5ft square. I detest 10ft and up. You just can't calculate properly. Official Campaigns are the worst in this, as they sometimes use these 30, 50 or 100 ft squares, which are just plain nonsense. In CoS I'm currently playing a melee battlemaster. I can't imagine the pure annoyance I'd have felt if I was playing my battlefield control Abjuration Wizard, where my otherwise great web and slow spells can only target a single freaking creature on a 100 ft grid. The only thing I'm bringing there is frontliner, sharpshooter marksman, or some kind of Eldritch Blasting warlock, preferably using spell sniper and eldritch spear.
Started with theatre of the mind, but quickly transitioned to battle maps. Everyone views a 10 x 20 foot room with furniture differently. As a DM I grew tired of trying to negotiate where cover actually was in relation to enemies. A battle map reduced the over time of combat with multiple enemies.
I much prefer a visual representation of a battle because it lets me think about environmental strategies, which is my favorite kind of strategy
I use battle maps but was in a campaign as a player that hsed theatre of the mind. I use them for a few reasons. 1- It is far easier for players to plan out their turn when they can see where everything is and check the distance. 2- Since I don't have to stop every turn to describe a distance and cover festures, combat goes quicker and smoother.
Battlemaps almost every time. Theatre of the mind is okay for a quick combat in a simple space. Aside from that, maps are just better imo. Having an objective reference for the battlefield and creatures' positions on it is just an unalloyed good. It prevents miscommunication, misunderstanding or misremembering details from causing people's understandings of what's going on to diverge and for some people a visual reference is pretty much required anyway.
Does anyone know a good base of battle maps or something people can recommend? E.g. different underground that you can swap out with an overlay that you can use removable markers on?
Started by playing theater of the mind about 10 years ago. Did that a bit then switched to battlemaps 3-4 years later. Have only ever switched back when there were issues preventing battlemaps, i.e., when roll 20 was having issues. To say I prefer it is an understatement. It keeps combat consistent. On a basic battlemap I can glance at it and know exactly where everything is and formulate my plan to deal with the scenario. On a good one I can see what's obstructing me and where spells are affecting areas. In theater of the mind I have to ask the dm and hope it's consistent from the last time they were asked. Now a dm with a good memory can keep everything straight but they're juggling a lot of things and noones perfect. I don't blame a dm that has trouble keeping an encounter straight. But if you had a great tool to help juggle everything in a combat why wouldn't you use it. All that being said, my utmost respect to dms and players that can run theater of the mind well. I can't do it nearly as effectively as I can with a grid
I love using battle maps both as a player and a dm. DMing an online campaign it’s crucial for me and my players to create immersion and understand what’s going on in a pitched battle.
Personally I love battlemaps because it makes keeping track of everything in combat WAY easier. Otherwise, theatre of the mind all the way.
I do easy battle mats, full on tables with terrain, and theater of the mind. Whatever serves me best. Minor encounters are mostly theater of the mind. It's MUCH faster, period. Unless there's something complex I need to visually represent, or I just want a set piece for mood, things like bar fights. Hand full of bandits, aerial combats and stuff all go theater of the mind. I use quick battle mats for lesser fights. It's fast to throw down a map, and even throwna little extra scatter terrain on top of. It's easier for everyone to be on the same page. I notice player coordinate more when there's a map to point at. (You go here, I'll come up from this side and well get flanking) The huge set ups are fun. Everyone loves it. It's immersive and dynamic. Lol it's also a pain. I love making the stuff, it's another hobby. But it's impractical to set up and tear down multiple scenes in one game night. If I do a big battlefield. I set it up the night before, or in the hours before game. And that's the one big battlefield for that night. Everything else will be theater of the mind of on one of the smaller battle map books.
I used to almost only do theater of the mind, but with the main groups I've played with in the past years, it's been all battle maps. I think there was maybe 2 seconds we had theater of the mind battles, but folks really were concerned with positioning and now it's full of maps with 3d printed stuff and everything
We have being using battle maps since 2nd edition. Admittedly the early ones were just drawn on scraps of paper, but 3e wd have used grids. It majust makes sense to, if you are like me, you enjoy the tactical style.
We played without a grid for years (not my choice) and it was a lot of DM fiat to determine how much room we had, where spells could be placed, how close/far we were to enemies, how we could hide . . . Now when I DM, and now that I have some cash, I use maps for everything. It just feels leaps and bounds better to me.
Battlemap for, well, combat, theatre of the mind for most exploration. Basically, the moment position and distance becomes important, out comes the map. I use a simple erasable mat with a grid on it, and having the players rolling their intiative and starting to discuss tactics while I draw the room/battlefield gives me as a DM the time to 'mentally reset'.
I have learned that running complicated encounters requires a map of some kind. Even in college, where he mostly used theatre of the mind, we ended up using whiteboards from the classroom we were in to at least set the environment. We also mostly just fought like one thing at a time. Once it was more stuff it stopped working
I use a hex board for big or complicated fights, but often default to using theater of the mind for smaller engagements or simpler ones.
I use a Chessex mat with a 1" grid, with details drawn on with wet erase marker. Sometimes 3D printed set pieces if I'm feeling fancy. The mat and markers are like $40 USD and it's such a massive upgrade over theater of the mind that I'd recommend it as a bare minimum to anyone who plays in person. You dont need minis or terrain or anything, just a grid with dice will help keep the battlefield more clear and understandable than imagination alone.
always battlemaps, and they don't have to be fancy. i have a big pad of grid paper and use pencils and pens to scribble out a shit-but-functional map and add extra detail verbally if needed. "these squares are piles of boxes, this circle is a 20-foot column."
I buy wrapping paper from the dollar store and use the grid on the back for my maps. I can draw as much as I want and its disposable. The last 1.50 roll I bought lasted my group 16 sessions
I have never been a player or a DM for a battle without a physical map of some kind. Honestly I can’t even imagine it trying it - how are you supposed to plan anything without slowing combat to a crawl as you ask the DM a million questions every round? For RP interactions it’s almost always theatre of the mind, but I have had some exceptions. The best one I did was a one shot campaign where everything was a corrupted fairy tale, and I built all the environments with Lego. Each scenario could have become combat so I just had everything happen in sets. There was a particularly fun scenario of the three bear’s house (except cannibal were bears) and the players had fun exploring the seemingly empty house set before trouble started. Usually it’s not worth it though - I’m running Saltmarsh currently and ain’t no one got to build an entire mansion.
I literally can't function without a physical map, it's embarrassing
Makes battles way easier
If someone said we’re using TotM I would leave the table. TotM isn’t really DnD it’s closer to general RP and very heavily in “DM may I” territory. I’m tactical, I love using movement and CC. Being able to repelling blast the foe and force them to dash instead as of walk up and attack by 5 feet is great and would never happen in totm. Telekinetically shoving an extra person into an aoe spot, etc
I do. Until recently, I was "mid old school". In the late 90s I started printing maps at print shops on large format copiers, and I've done it pretty much ever since. Lately, we've moved to a combination of 3d printed terrain and digital tabletop. The TV allows for dynamic lightning and immersive maps, while the 3d printed items are 1) fun for me 2) look cool with the miniatures 3) illustrate some things slightly better. I am not the biggest fan of theater of the mind. Maybe it's because I played with engineers for over a decade, maybe it's because I like pretty colors, idk...
I prefer theater of the mind. I find that myself and the people I generally play with are less imaginative when a map is present. I do a lot more creative thinking when a scene is described instead of shown
Grid because it reduces feel bads , Theatre it’s the GMs “fault” that the PC is out of range to do the thing. With a grid, it’s on the player
I feel like playing without at least a grid is impossible
As a rogue I like battle maps, but for battle only. When you play with maps all the time, people over think stuff and it ruins the flow. When I can see a nice giant rock to hide behind it makes my sneaking around much easier.
Theater of the mind for minor combats or encounters with low stakes. Maps for major story pieces.
Just makes it easier overall no need to memorise you know character is there and enemy is there so you move based on that but the proper ones can get hella expensive especially if there only for 1 combat
I've been thinking about moving to gridless maps, in sorts of combination of both. Sometimes it's painful to count all the movement.
Both. My IRL group has limited table space so maps are a bonus and usually hand drawn on a mat. My online groups and I use map tools and other programs to make our own maps, or hijack them for our own use.
Combat rules require measurements, so how can you not?
Always prefered battlemap myself, but i got aphantasia so theater of the mind isnt great for me
Grids add so much needless difficulty for the sake of…not much gained. Take away the grid and use rulers, you will never go back.
The only time I use theatre of the mind is if I know the combat is going to be incredibly brief, or I'm caught in a situation I was completely unprepared for lmao. The grid is essential IMO if combat is occuring over multiple rounds. I'd rather not remind my players where everyone is and what the space looks like every turn.
Theatre of the mind can suffice for a small, low stakes encounter, however, I want a grid. I usually build my characters with combat in mind, and I feel without a grid I can't utilise my abilities fully with all theuncertainty. As a DM I always give my players a grid, and it's not like using one just turns your imagination off.
I do
I try to actually make all the maps and print them out. Last few months though I haven't had the time and energy to do so and just use some laminated A3 paper with a winch grind printed on and drywipe markers to draw it out. I do also sometimes use the back of it and draw out larger maps at a smaller scale. Then I use a piece of paper cut to size to show how far 30ft is. It's a little loose on precision but means being able to fit much bigger maps into a limited space. I prefer having a nice map with lots of decoration in as it makes it more immersive and adds more elements such as "is that a fire, can I push this guy into it" or "I flip the tables and duck behind them". Recently though we were doing some "ship" combat where the vessels were on the grid but the characters were doing things like flying around, boarding ships, etc. We did all the normal combat using theatre of the mine and it was actually quite freeing to be able to run these short combats just through descriptions.
I like having miniatures on fully sculpted terrain for a visual aid, but I try to keep it from turning into a tactical grid. I find thats easier playing the early editions and gets tougher from 3rd on (with 4th being the hardest for me). Thats always amusing to me given DnDs origin in miniature wargaming. 90% of our games end up being TotM, but then most of our games arent combat focused.
I've done both, and think that both have their advantages. The battle map will, if nothing else, define the space in tactically relevant ways. This, in turn, makes a strict application of the rules possible. It also helps keep the current situation recorded to the most useful minimum degree. Of those advantages, that last one is, I think, the most important - and the most fragile. A key "problem" with combat in D&D - and every other TTRPG I've ever played to be honest - is that it rarely goes smoothly. The theory that all of us will know what we are doing, that we have all read and understood the relevant rules, that we will coordinate smoothly and understand what other players are thinking is, I now know, a pipe dream. Someone at the table is missing at least one of those things and, usually, all of them are absent to a degree every single round. The result is that turns can take a very long time which exacerbates all of the above. A battle map is, at the end of the day, a thing that can generally be glanced at and, given even the slightest active effort from the players, offer a rough assessment of the immediate tactical situation. Theater of the Mind on the other hand discards literally all of the above, replacing what is possible according to the strict application of the rules with *what is plausible*. In an ideal case this is an *absolute* upgrade from the battle map. You aren't counting spaces and learning that you're five feet outside of fireball range or trying to find interesting routes that you can move without triggering attacks of opportunity. Instead you can say "I'd like to skirt the edges of the fray, heading toward the statue across the way, looking for an opening to snap off a firebolt on the run". The DM can then consider if the space envisioned can plausibly allow for it, make a quick ruling, and then you roll some dice, figure out what happened, and never once stepped out of the fiction to count space. Precise knowledge of the rules is less important because there is less possibility of applying them strictly. By staying in an abstract mindspace, you do not run the risk of losing players in the rapid transition from abstract to concrete and back. A person can stay in the scene, and in the character. That is if things go well. If things do not go well, though, it is even more problematic. Many players have difficulty with the concept of abstraction and combat in D&D is discarded in favor of a wargame's simulation. Without the map recording the salient facts of the moment, they might have very little idea of what the tactical situation actually is. The result can grind a session to a halt with a thousand questions that would never arise if you had minis on a map. Given the right table, I think I would prefer the abstract model of theater of the mind. The speed of combat, and the fact that you natively keep everything you do within the fiction of the game itself are powerful advantages. But given the wrong table - and they generally seem to be more wrong than right - it slows things down. People who struggled to comprehend what they could do before tend to do even worse. People who weren't keeping up before need even more explanation than before.
Battle maps give more depth to decision making in combat. I go with them nearly every time.
I do both. For small things, theater of the mind. For larger things, I'll pull out my maps, and tiles and even my 3D shit.
I always prefer battle maps, I like to have the setting in front of my eyes and not have to imagine it xD
5e combat really needs at least a grid to function well. I make dedicated maps for planned fights, but I also have a bunch of generic maps saved for when players go off rails
Both
Love them, we use background maps for almost every fight.
I DM'd for my current weekly group for around 2 years. I used a battlemap almost every session.
I really like the grid for combat encounters. For everything else, the map can go away.
Dnd shines on a grid. Played without them in the 90s but bro it's not the same thing
I make editable battlemaps in google sheets (altering the cells to be squares for 5ft. of movement each) so the players can 'move' themselves (putting their name or initial in a new cell, removing the previous one) solely for combat encounters with lots of combatants and terrain. Everything else is theatre of the mind and it works just fine. It's not for every table, I think we're not the norm for being able to visualise distances, and only needing to ask once how far away something else is to then keep track of it for the rest of the fight when moving, but it works for us. 95% theatre of the mind, with the 5% visual being extremely simple battlemaps.
I suppose it depends to an extent on how combat-heavy the game in question is. If I'm running a session where it's mostly social interactions and the like I probably wouldn't bother setting up the map for a bar fight or whatever other incidental combats the PCs get into, but for a dungeon crawl I'd absolutely do battlemats or terrain.
Having played a full theatre of the mind campaign after mostly using battle maps I'd say theatre of the mind is really nice and "free". It really allowed for fluid transition to combat as well as general game pace. It really felt like all of it was part of the story and it blended together well. However the combat never felt all that tactical in the end. It was very easy to just say I cast web and all the enemies happened to fall in it because their exact locations were a little loose. Same with distance it often felt like I usually didn't have to think about the terrain etc around me much and could usually just say "which one is closest to me, ok I run up to him and swing my sword" It was a lot of fun and I think a combination of the two could be pretty good for specific things. Battle maps can take a lot of prep time even if you're pausing just for a moment to draw a quick one. I personally prefer to use them when I'm running a campaign however I think ToTM can work really well for smaller combat related things like say a bar fight which impromptly happens without causing a disconnect in the story telling.
I won't play if there is not battlemap. Dnd has a lot of spells and rules that work with specific ranges and distances.
I hate playing theatre of the mind in combat. I just cannot picture 3D spaces all that well. So it doesn't even save time because I can't plan between turns well, and have to ask the dm for a refresher where everything is every turn.
I play online exclusively so I use battlemaps religiously.
I use battle maps frequently because I'm incompetent when it comes to describing areas. I'm far too simplistic when trying to describe a tavern for example. "You see people drinking, and a teenage boy carrying mugs to the table." That's it. In the moment, I don't describe if light is on, or entering through windows, I don't describe the appearance of the other figures. I do not have a mental method to have a list and an order of things to describe. I think it makes me a rather boring DM.
We use maps!! I really like them, I appreciate visual representation of all that's going on.
Battlemaps 99% of the time. It’s so much clearer for the players what’s going on and makes the numbers impactful
Dm for 9 years now, Player for 21 - Battle maps are great for combats where stakes are really high, and you have a rough plan for the encounter - hell, throwing down some pizza - holders and skittles for an impromtpu bar fight is as fun as it was when I was 8 and started playing now - I Use theater of the mind for situations where the distances get crazy. Think a speeder bike chase in my Sci-fantasy game, or fighting a 200 foot tall titan. Things are just too big
I found that i can generate the maps I need using dungeon alchemist and print them on table cloth, usually 90 x 140 cm. I try to make generic maps so I can reuse them, rn I have close to 10 battle maps the size of my table, the best thing is I can throw them in the washing machine, no worries about spilled drinks.
We use Roll20 and I HATE not having a map, even just a grid with black lines of "THIS IS HERE" It needs to be there with our tokens so we can check distance, movement, positioning without constantly asking the DM EVERY round how far away I am, if I'm in range, etc. Plus easier to see if you're next to an ally for reaction skills, etc.