Quote from: 1989;532928Get out! I've never seen a game of D&D played WITH grids.

The first game of 4e I sat in on was on a grid. I've played skirmish wargames that had (a LOT) more roleplaying going on... but I blame that on the players.
Our game table has a big grid covering that the GM made... so pretty much all our battles (anything with more than 2 combatants) are on a grid, with miniatures or markers of some sort.
Personally I'd rather abstain unless something really complex is happening.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;532827I really enjoy the GURPS system and enjoy running it. Over half of our playing group doesn't like it in spite of loving the control in character creation. The simple reason:  

NO LEVELS

There is no rush of adrenaline as your character suddenly DINGS and gains all new abilities and generally becomes more badass all around.

Even though steady gains of character points that can be used to improve immediately without waiting for levels to be gained are more immediately gratifying and useful, the lack of level climbing is the big turn off.

I don't really get it.

They learned that way of thinking from their video games.

Quote from: Simlasa;532831I'm guessing that's a common reaction for folks coming from D&D-ish level-based games (or video games like WOW).

My brother is addicted to WoW.  I'll watch some of his gaming.  But all it is is a chase camera (so all you ever see of your character is the back end) following you and nothing in the game attacks unless you attack it first.  Then the "enemy" runs up to face you and it's melee time (which means repeatedly pressing a button faster and faster than the other guy until someone falls dead).

Repeat this same process ad nauseum.

Quote from: gleichman;532913Too much of D&D are corridoor and doorway fights, but even then I have never seen any version of D&D played without a grid and minis (or some markers) in real life.

I had to go online to hear people make that the claim that they play without them. And if they do, I say they play poorly.

I've watched such games.  It's painful.  People sitting around the room asking the DM where their character is in relation to the guy they want to attack.  And the DM saying, "He's behind you."  And another player asking, "What is my character doing?  Am I close enough to help them?"

These people obviously have known each other for years and this is more just a social night for them and not a serious RPG session.

Quote from: gleichman;532877Without a grid and minis- you're combats are a made up fantasy, inconsistent and without a doubt breaking the rules multiple times during play. Unless of course all you battles are one-dimensional, in which case they are boring.

Holy crap, I've been doing it WRONG for over 25 years! :eek:

:rolleyes:

Now, don't get me wrong; I've used a whiteboard to draw at tabletop before; or even Paint + Wacom tablet for online games, but I've never felt like a grid was required.

To be honest, the first time I ever saw a battlemap used (other than at a Con), was for D&D 3.5

Quote from: gleichman;532917Takes time and effort to convert (reminding me each time that the game is junk), far easier to stick with 5th edition where grids and minis were directly supported and area of effects well defined.

The market seems to agree, 5th was a major success, while 6th edition resulted in them basically closing shop.

It took a store in town over a year to sell four 6th edition vol 1 books and only one of the vol 2 books.  That told me the game lost some of its magic since 5th edition.

Quote from: 1989;532925Range of Death Ray is 20 metres ... = 10 squares. Sounds easy enough to me.

Are you a metric hater?

No, but I don't prefer it.


Here's a example of why grids and minis are needed

The (P)layers are in position A
Tango A is 50 meters directly north of them
Tango B is 75 meters directly west of the tem
There's a 5 meter by 6 meter (runing east-west) building 25 meters to the northwest.
(A)llied NPC is 25 meters to the south and 5 meters to the west of (P)


(A) attempts to uses their telepathic Dominate power to subvert Tango B into attacking Tango A


Questions:
What's the Range between (A) and Tango B
What's the range between Tango B and Tango A?
Does the building block line of sight between Tango B and Tango A?
Does the building block line of sight between (A) and Tango B?

Yes, you can figure that out by basic Geometry- have fun with the squaring and square roots. meanwhile A grid and mini (or well scaled drawing) will reveal the answers in a glance. And have fun placing the building in relation to the newly revealed line of fire.

Now, mulitple the number of figures on both sides by a factor of ten or more. I run battles with 20 to 60 combatants typically- and at times up to 300 figures on the board. Muliple the terrain features by a factor of ten as well. And I want correct and consistent answers to any question of range, position, facing, and line of sight *immediately* to keep the battle flowing.

This isn't your D&D hallway fight with a 10' front followed by another hallway fight with a 10' fight. I outgrewth those 36 years ago.

6th Edition changes so little, it doesn't make sense to change over from 5th, especially given the mountain of material I have bought (admittingly second-hand).

There's less of a change between 5th & 6th edition HERO, than between 3.0 & 3.5 D&D.

I have very little experience with HERO, and all of it 4e.

What changed between 4e and 5e?

Quote from: gleichman;532978I run battles with 20 to 60 combatants typically- and at times up to 300 figures on the board. Muliple the terrain features by a factor of ten as well. And I want correct and consistent answers to any question of range, position, facing, and line of sight *immediately* to keep the battle flowing.

Not meaning to be snide, but do you think that's the norm for most RPG games?
It's something I see far more often in miniature wargames (like WH/WH40k or Chainmail, etc).

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;532973These people obviously have known each other for years and this is more just a social night for them and not a serious RPG session.

What makes an RPG session "serious"?

For some reasons, I am reminded of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwn9imAGbjc&feature=related

"Put the beers down. This is a serious game."

Quote from: The Butcher;532982I have very little experience with HERO, and all of it 4e.

What changed between 4e and 5e?

I didn't play previous to 5th, but my understanding is they basically took it back to 3rd; added in several new powers, advantages, and disadvantages; and condensed the ruleset as much as possible to the one book.

Quote from: Novastar;532983Not meaning to be snide, but do you think that's the norm for most RPG games?
It's something I see far more often in miniature wargames (like WH/WH40k or Chainmail, etc).

Not meaning to be snide, but don't you think it might be possible for you to do the same in a RPG if you but used a map and minis? And thus used your brain to play the game instead of wasting it on (incorrectly) visuallizing it.

For me, these are not uncommon numbers. Nor have I every had a single new players express surprise when they encounter them (Ok, the 300 figures was considered rather cool and special).

Quote from: misterguignol;532984What makes an RPG session "serious"?

Pipes, a measuring stick, and a slight frown.