Quick Combat Poll!
Hello, everyone! Today, I have a question for you: which type of combat representation do you prefer? As I start thinking about future games and how they interact with my Momentum Engine, it would be really helpful to see what you, the people playing my games, prefer. This is something that I understand can vary depending on the game itself, so it's just a gross generalization to give me a surface-level idea of your preferences.
So these are the options:
Grid-based (or hex-based, it's essentially the same), like in Across a Thousand Dead Worlds, or Carnage & Aether: The most tactical option, offering more granularity when it comes to decision-making. This could also be smaller grids, like I did with Choir of Flesh, which has a very tight 5 by 5 grid that offers tactical choices and fast resolution.
Zone-based, like in Riftbreakers 2e or Salvage & Sorcery. The next step down the complexity ladder, this offers some tactical options and positioning, without having to go too deep into details.
Ranged-based, like in Machine Gods of the Noxian Expanse. This is similar to zone based, but instead of having absolute zones, you have ranges that change from each of the character's perspectives, so I personally think it can be a bit confusing, and I doubt I'll ever use it again.
Theatre of the Mind, like Ker Nethalas, or Broken Shores. Here, positioning, ranges, and movement are kind of abstracted and often irrelevant. It's quick and easy, but it can devolve into just rolling to attack and little else.
So, what's your favorite? Did I miss any? Please let me know in the comments!
Comments (38)
I use TOTM with accasional zone based doodles.
I voted for grid, but scaled down so it doesn't turn into full blown tabletop miniature game. I guess the reasoning behind it is it makes it easier to manage when fighting multiple enemies at the same time (they surround you rather than pile up) and when you want to main a ranged weapon, like a bow you can gauge how many times you can shoot before the enemy reaches you and whether you can disengage and outrun them to make another shot or just have to switch to melee once engaged.
All very good reasons, I agree!
Probably more complex decision than it seems a first. I voted grid, but it really depends on the other objectives of the game. Weirdly, I was actually thinking about incorporating a grid into Riftbreakers yesterday in order to get a more clear view of which opponents are 'engaged' with one another (it can get kinda messy/confusing once you include companions and scale up the number of opponents in fights accordingly). Still, the "zones" range bands system works great in Riftbreakers and, especially, in a game that's meant to be more 'simple' like S&S. I haven't dug into WA much yet but I imagine that'd be hard to run as theater of the mind and range bands wouldn't really 'do it justice.' Theater of the mind works well in KN, but I found it got confusing for me without miniatures or tokens of some sort to track all the combatants once I started running the game for a group of players
Yes, it totally depends on the type of game you're playing. Warlord Ascendant is a skirmish game and it will absolutely not work as a TotM type of thing, it would be a mess.
Grid - Tactical decisions
Yes, grid combat is always interesting, if the game supports that type of thing properly!
Went with zone but Im good with all including Ranged.
Thanks for voting!
I actually really liked the machine gods range system 😂 I guess the zone based one could be a bit easier to keep track of but I personally found it pretty intuitive and felt easy to RP around as well
I'm glad you like it, haha. I find it can be a bit confusing some times, and a lot of people get confused because like I said, it's all subjective and not absolute, the range depends on who's acting and that sometimes is difficult to visualize.
I prefer grid based. Sorry, I want to use my miniatures.
Hell yeah! It's honestly my favorite, if the game in question has enough tactical options. If it's the default just for no reason then it becomes a burden.
I think zones are the best of both worlds. I am often playing with limited space. So actually using a board or minis is usually out of the question when I play at home. And while you can track a simple grid on note paper, I find it a bit of a hassle to do. But I do sometimes want a bit more granularity than full theater of the mind.
I also enjoy zones as the best of both worlds, although my experiment with Choir of Flesh of using a really small grid turned out quite well, so I'm sure I'll use it again. But yes, zone based combat is probably going to be my go-to in the future.
I prefer theater of the mind, but I hope it can be more than just rolling to attack. I think the idea of theater of the mind is that the actions are narrative and thus create a sort of cinematic back and forth. So I guess I would say theater of the mind with the addition of strategic and thematic abilities.
I've played TotM my whole life, but like I said before, when I started playing solo I felt it helped to have some sort of visual representation of things. And I think most people feel that way too because Sacrifice 1e, Broken Shores, Riftbreakers 1e, all had TotM combat and you can't imagine how many times I had to explain how it worked, everyone seemed super confused.
Coming from a miniature gamer standpoint, I always like being able to actually see the movements and positioning. I like grid method, followed by zones. The grid gives the feeling of actual combat and jockeying for advantage. Whereas zones gives you a sense of urgency watching the enemy get close and knowing you've only got a turn or so before the get into melee.
Yes, that makes a lot of sense!
Totally not helpful answer, all of the above plus battle line like in Fabula Ultima. Combat should be tailored to the feel of the game that you want to make.
Agreed! Each game has different needs!
Grid/Hex but smaller like ATDW. Then zone, which is actually easier for a small play area or travel
I'm lately liking even smaller than ATDW! It makes combat feel super tight and frenetic.
Colg TotM or grid both methods have a place depending on the game you play.
Sorry folks, Grid, all the way! Zone is close second.
Haha hell yeah!
I like the tactical option of movement (also makes it easier to use miniatures or tokens if one wishes to do so).
Yeah, I like having a little bit of more options when it comes to combat, and simply being able to move around makes a huge difference, especially if you play a ranged character.
Definitely zone based, followed by theatre of the mind. I find zones are the easiest to keep track of in solo play.
I agree, zones are awesome!
Pretty new to TTRPGs, so I haven't tried all these styles. I've tried both TotM and grid-based. I really enjoy both, but I do enjoy TotM a little more when I'm feeling a more chill session, and grid-based more when I wanna get more into the granularity. I don't know if I have a favourite, I think they each have their place. I think the other two styles also totally have their place if the context of the system makes sense for it.
I agree, it depends on the type of game you're playing, some games are more suited for tactical combat, others don't need it!
Zone based seem to hold the best middle ground. Personally I'm all about the TotM. It's the way we have always done it for the last thirty plus years. We often added a little bonus if you could describe your combat action in a cool way (admittedly doesn't work very well solo...)
I've always done TotM as well, but once I started playing solo it actually helped me to have some visual representation of what's going on, so I really enjoy zone based or grid combat.
Voted grid but I enjoy theater of the mind just as much. Not all that big on things in the middle like zone or range based
Thanks for your feedback!
My Top pick is Zone based followed very closely by Theater of the mind
I am a big fan of zone based as well, yeah!