|
8 months ago ::
Nov 13, 2012 - 5:55PM
#11
|
|
|
The only problem is that they are a little fragile.
I've had to super-glue them (with a little baking soda to firm it up).
Unfortunately, that does fog up the clear plastic.
I've just finished casting molds so I can create epoxy copies.
Colors
Show
Bow down, my subjects, for I am your master! Yesss.....
Show
For some reason, none of my friends were surprised by this...
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 6:58AM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Jul 27, 2006
|
I second the recommendation for Gamemastery Flight stands, also know as flying figure stands from Litko game accessories. I used to have trouble representing flying creatures at the table. Players constantly had to ask which creatures were in the air, and who could attack who. The stands solve this problem for medium creatures. The stands allow you to position one figure over another, or to set a die under a flying figure to indicate elevation. Fourth edition’s non-Euclidian geometry simplifies flight, because flyers can rise or descend one square of elevation for each square moved across the map.The flight stands come in three pieces that require assembly. Typical CA glue will fog the clear acrylic, so I suggest using the Craftics #33 Thick Acrylic Cement. Use nail clippers to trim the long tabs on the vertical support so they fit flush with the base and platform. The stands are fragile, so keep them in a box.
Dave from dmdavid.com
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 7:19AM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Jul 27, 2006
|
A mapless game only becomes bogged down in boring descriptions in layout and dimensions if the DM is the sole proprieter of that information. As soon as players' brains are engaged to help provide detail, and their ideas are accepted and added on to, there's never another "wrong" answer to questions about those details
I don't mean to suggest that going mapless means the DM must keep everything in his head, while the players ask permission for every move. In a mapfree game, each player at the table bears a burden for staying engaged, and communicating their character's place in the game world to everyone else at the table.
Plenty of players enjoy play a fast and loose narrative style, where the story of the combat matters more than tactical nuances. If everyone at your table enjoys that style, forget the map.
Also, I'm happy to see that the D&D Next designers understand that not every combat needs a map, and that the game doesn't need to encourage every combat to assume a scale that merits a map.
"Force" them? "Clear the room"?
I've run many adventures in an organized play environment, where the author lovingly crafted an interesting setting for a combat encounter, complete with multiple levels, and cool terrain features. Too often, the players all stand bunched up near the entrance until all enemies are defeated. They might as well have fought in a 20x20 room. I encourage DMs and adventure authors to find ways to motivate the players to move around the setting as the battle rages.
I rarely feel that gameplay suffers when I ignore lighting, so I do it all the times. So I'm pleased to learn that I'm not alone in glossing over it. D&D rules traditionally devote much time and attention to lighting, but that exaggerates its place in the game.
Dave from dmdavid.com
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 12:21PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
I don't mean to suggest that going mapless means the DM must keep everything in his head, while the players ask permission for every move. In a mapfree game, each player at the table bears a burden for staying engaged, and communicating their character's place in the game world to everyone else at the table.
Even that I'm not sure of. Positioning really matters only very rarely,
"Force" them? "Clear the room"?
I've run many adventures in an organized play environment, where the author lovingly crafted an interesting setting for a combat encounter, complete with multiple levels, and cool terrain features. Too often, the players all stand bunched up near the entrance until all enemies are defeated. They might as well have fought in a 20x20 room. I encourage DMs and adventure authors to find ways to motivate the players to move around the setting as the battle rages.
This can be done, but I've rarely seen the work but in to accomplish it pay off to much of a degree.
Alternate goals help somewhat, I've found, and don't require much map design. Last session, my characters had to get from one end to the other in a succession of rooms, with the monsters trying to stop them or accomplish other specific goals, such as killing the prisoner they had with them. There was very little interesting terrain in the rooms, but the PCs definitely had to move, and killing all of the enemies wouldn't necessarily have helped them.
Alternate goals for the enemies can make it less likely that the monsters will just meet the PCs in the middle and stand there. If the alternate goal is important enough, the monsters might have to disengage in order to accomplish it, forcing the PCs to chase them if they want to win.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 16, 2012 - 1:30PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2001
|
We're moving generally back to the abstract combat system. It seemed over the years the players brains had become more focused on 5' steps (sorry for my archaic terminology), than on trying to think outside the box.
That said of course, we've done everything under the sun for elevation, etc. Our most common things are: clear dice containers for elevated creatures and "dice marking 5'" when people are "out of range".
jh
Gamer Chiropractor - Hafner Chiropractic 305 S. Kipling st,Suite C-2, Lakewood, Co 80226 www.hafnerchiropractic.com
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 17, 2012 - 12:28PM
#16
|
|
|
We're moving generally back to the abstract combat system. It seemed over the years the players brains had become more focused on 5' steps (sorry for my archaic terminology), than on trying to think outside the box.
That said of course, we've done everything under the sun for elevation, etc. Our most common things are: clear dice containers for elevated creatures and "dice marking 5'" when people are "out of range".
jh
You know, I've heard several DMs talk about "zone combats" as a sort of halfway point between "combat grid" and "theatre of the mind". The idea is for there to be distinct zones, each with unique traits, that PCs can transition between with one ormore move actions. The relationship of these zones might be sketched out on paper (not to scale), and PC minis/markers placed on their current zone to keep track.
For example, if you have a fight in a dwarven golem-works, you might have five zones, with lines between representing which connect to which, and DM notse explaining conditions/features of each zone:
1. Furnace and Boiler Room
2. Hall of Golems
3. Catwalk
4. Room of Golem Control Crystals
5. Big Turning Gear
Has anyone rune a "zone combat"? How'd it go?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 17, 2012 - 12:45PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
We're moving generally back to the abstract combat system. It seemed over the years the players brains had become more focused on 5' steps (sorry for my archaic terminology), than on trying to think outside the box.
That said of course, we've done everything under the sun for elevation, etc. Our most common things are: clear dice containers for elevated creatures and "dice marking 5'" when people are "out of range".
jh
You know, I've heard several DMs talk about "zone combats" as a sort of halfway point between "combat grid" and "theatre of the mind". The idea is for there to be distinct zones, each with unique traits, that PCs can transition between with one ormore move actions. The relationship of these zones might be sketched out on paper (not to scale), and PC minis/markers placed on their current zone to keep track.
For example, if you have a fight in a dwarven golem-works, you might have five zones, with lines between representing which connect to which, and DM notse explaining conditions/features of each zone:
1. Furnace and Boiler Room
2. Hall of Golems
3. Catwalk
4. Room of Golem Control Crystals
5. Big Turning Gear
Has anyone rune a "zone combat"? How'd it go?
I sort of have. It's the standard approach from Spirit of the Century and probably other Fate and Fudge games. It hadn't occurred to me to give zones different aspects, but that's a great idea. Their main function is just to separate combat a bit. You can shoot, punch, or hit anyone in your zone. You can shoot someone in another zone. Particularly long-range weapons can hit someone two more more zones away. Moving (or moving someone else) to another zone takes some effort, but you can move pretty freely within your own zone. Zones sometimes have barriers that require even more movement. I should explore this further.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
