Some advice desired.

[Alejandro]

Hey all,

I just started playing in a campaign run by another member of our gaming group. We're playing the Hoard of the Dragon Queen module; had the first session this weekend. We had fun, and the GM is a good GM, but here is the problem:

The GM has said he wants to run this campaign in 'theater of the mind' style, that is, no grids or minis. We thought this odd, since this person in previous games has always used mats, minis, Roll20, whatever the case may be. The rest of the group very much also likes having mats and minis, and we enjoy finding minis that resemble our PCs, and painting them as well.

During this first game, I resorted to keeping little rows of tokens in front of me, representing the kobolds and other enemies we were fighting, so I could keep track of how many were left. There was not much tactical movement, we had to ask the GM repeatedly "Can I move far enough to attack X" or "Will I provoke an AOO?" I am concerned that it will get worse, because we have several PCs that depend a lot on knowing precisely where everyone is:

- a blasty wizard
- a barbarian that uses a reach polearm, and plans on taking Polearm Master explicitly to force enemies to provoke by approaching him
- a monk that wants to move around a lot and strike enemies

Etc.

How should I bring this up? Am I overreacting? It seems to me that this setup really needs at least a basic battlemat?

[mephnick]

I like theatre of the mind, just not for D&D. It's advanced, or devolved (depending on your opinion), beyond that.

It works for Numenera and Dungeon World, because they are designed to be played without tools from the ground up. Despite how much they state it in the PHB, 5e is still designed around tactical combat, maps and minis.

Theatre of the mind can work in 5e, but you HAVE to base your characters and party composition around that idea AND have every single player on board.

Edit: As far as actual advice...ask your DM to revert to maps and minis if that's what the rest of the party wants. If he won't for some stupid reason, and he should, ask him if he will let you make new characters that don't focus so much of precise options.

[EvanescentHero]

I've rarely played without a mat in sessions that weren't one-on-one, and I find it difficult to do so with more than that--say, a full-sized party. The issue would be compounded in any sort of battle with cover, difficult terrain, or around the same number of enemies (or more!) as the size of the party. Now, that could just be me requiring some sort of visuals to be able to imagine a fight of that scale, but I think it would be tough to actually have any sort of tactical depth in a purely TotM game. It seems like you're not the only one in your group who feels this way either, so I'd definitely talk to your DM.

[calebrus]

How should I bring this up? Am I overreacting? It seems to me that this setup really needs at least a basic battlemat?

It depends on the group.
Some players need that visual cue. Some DMs can describe things well enough that it isn't needed. Most groups fall somewhere in the middle.
Our table, for example, primarily uses TotM in play (with a quick not-to-scale map of the area so that we know the basic layout), and the DM only draws out actual battle maps for boss fights (and even then, only sometimes).

I have been playing D&D for more than 20 years, and we never once used a grid until a few years after 3e released. This edition is actually far easier to play without a grid than 3e was, and we played that without a grid for a couple of years. This edition is easier (in my mind) to play without a grid than even 2e was, and we played 2e without ever once using a grid for about a decade or so.
With the play style of 3e and definitely 4e, and the prevalence that things like Roll20 have taken with the game, many players are under the impression that a battle map is needed, but honestly it isn't.

[Yagyujubei]

my group just uses a crude map that shows what the area looks like, we don't put tokens or anything down, but we feel it's important to be able to say "ok, 30 feet from this house is a fallen tree" or something like that.

so maybe just ask for a basic map of battle areas as a compromise. I know they exist for HotDQ, so he wouldn't even have to spend a ton of effort to make it happen.

[Eslin]

Hey all,

I just started playing in a campaign run by another member of our gaming group. We're playing the Hoard of the Dragon Queen module; had the first session this weekend. We had fun, and the GM is a good GM, but here is the problem:

The GM has said he wants to run this campaign in 'theater of the mind' style, that is, no grids or minis. We thought this odd, since this person in previous games has always used mats, minis, Roll20, whatever the case may be. The rest of the group very much also likes having mats and minis, and we enjoy finding minis that resemble our PCs, and painting them as well.

During this first game, I resorted to keeping little rows of tokens in front of me, representing the kobolds and other enemies we were fighting, so I could keep track of how many were left. There was not much tactical movement, we had to ask the GM repeatedly "Can I move far enough to attack X" or "Will I provoke an AOO?" I am concerned that it will get worse, because we have several PCs that depend a lot on knowing precisely where everyone is:

- a blasty wizard
- a barbarian that uses a reach polearm, and plans on taking Polearm Master explicitly to force enemies to provoke by approaching him
- a monk that wants to move around a lot and strike enemies

Etc.

How should I bring this up? Am I overreacting? It seems to me that this setup really needs at least a basic battlemat?

You're not overreacting - some TTRPGs are designed for TotM, some work with it, D&D is neither. It's balanced around movement and positioning being important, half the abilities lose their point in TotM.

[calebrus]

Edit: As far as actual advice...ask your DM to revert to maps and minis if that's what the rest of the party wants. If he won't for some stupid reason, and he should, ask him if he will let you make new characters that don't focus so much of precise options.

I could not disagree with this more.
The DM is in control of the feel of the game. If he wants to keep the game focused less on tactics and have more of a cinematic feel, then this is his campaign and this is his call.
Players should have no sense of entitlement regarding the theme and feel of a game.
The DM shouldn't change the game to fit whatever style his players feel like using. Players should adapt their play to whatever style the DM is using.

[Yagyujubei]

thats what he's saying though....the players would reroll characters that aren't so focused on positioning and things that require more precise knowledge of where everything is.

that isn't asking the DM to change anything, it's asking to; now that they know how the campaign will be, not have to play a character that will be gimped for the entire run of sessions.

I don't think that's unreasonable at all.

[Alejandro]

I could not disagree with this more.
The DM is in control of the feel of the game. If he wants to keep the game focused less on tactics and have more of a cinematic feel, then this is his campaign and this is his call.
Players should have no sense of entitlement regarding the theme and feel of a game.
The DM shouldn't change the game to fit whatever style his players feel like using. Players should adapt their play to whatever style the DM is using.

While I respect your opinion, um, no. Players do have entitlement to the theme and feel of a game. If they don't like it, they won't keep playing it, and then there is no game.

[Mandragola]

I could not disagree with this more.
The DM is in control of the feel of the game. If he wants to keep the game focused less on tactics and have more of a cinematic feel, then this is his campaign and this is his call.
Players should have no sense of entitlement regarding the theme and feel of a game.
The DM shouldn't change the game to fit whatever style his players feel like using. Players should adapt their play to whatever style the DM is using.

And I couldn't disagree much more with this.

It's for players and DMs to find a way of playing that suits them all. The DMG is full of advice on how to make everyone have more fun, including tips on different types of players and how they like to play. If you are all used to playing on a grid then it's weird for the DM to unilaterally change it for you all, especially for the combat-heavy elements of hotdq.

Talk to your friend. Ask why he wanted to try totm. If he just wants to try it out for a bit to see if it works then go with it for a few sessions and then say how you feel then. It might even work, once you're all more used to it. But also politely let your DM know how you feel.

[silveralen]

As long as you give it a fair shake it seems reasonable to ask for changes. Just give it a couple sessions, maybe see how your DM wants to handle certain things and see if you can find good solutions. If, after a couple sessions, it just isn't work and you haven't found good compromises, then it's time to ask for a reversion.

For example, a good way to handle a blast wizard is to establish a conversion formula based on area. You can add things like lightly or heavily clustered formulas if you want as well. That's one common grid~> totm conversion.

Another common way of speeding things up is to totm basic encounters, where fast and dirty combat works best, and have tactical combat in reserve for major combats.

But like I said, if it doesn't work for the group as a whole, say so. Just give it a fair shake first.