Super valuable site, but it's not even a fraction of a fraction of what The Trove is/was.5e.tools
Yep.
I'm huge into tactical combat games, so I really dislike not having a grid map for any combat encounter. Then at that point, the more detail the better, so walls/cover/etc an be accurately depicted.
Not to mention side conversations distracting people, people getting up to get a drink or food or use the bathroom. Maps just keep everybody on the same page.I'll say this, a lot of what can make or break a theatre of the mind encounter is the communication skill of players. That's not necessarily a slight on anyone... People are generally awful at effective communication. That's how you get players drawing the wrong maps or the constant "wait WHERE are the goblins?? I thought you said they were _____."
On top of that, it's incredibly hard to have perfect focus for a normal 4 hour game. Sometimes you just zone out for a few seconds and miss a crucial detail about placement. Maps can help avoid that because you don't have to remember exact details of where everyone is, you just look at the map and the tokens.
For me, the thought of running combat without a map sounds terrible. Even in the late 80s when I started playing, we'd draw out the area on graph paper or on a dry erase board. I've never played in or run a game without maps, but I do see the possible benefits of using theater of the mind. With it, there's a lot of room for DMs to embellish and use more rule-of-cool, whereas a grid-maps present nearly everything in definitive terms.
As a DM, one of major things that I don't like about maps is that players will often obligated to stay within the confines of the map area I provide for them, but I'm perfectly ok with them moving off the map area. Granted, it's usually not a problem because they usually need to be in range for melee/spells/whatever, but it occasionally comes up and players will usually just run to the edge of the map and stay there like there's an imaginary wall lol.
Little funny side note -- Last night, I ran my 5e session on Fantasy Grounds and the party decided to camp under a bridge after getting ambushed there. They had a detailed map, but even after me explaining their geographical orientation to them 3 or 4 times, they still couldn't get it right so I just threw my hands up and was like "Yep, sure, yep..that's right."
I don't think I can disagree with you.I swear one of those guys fundamentally has west and east reversed in his head.
Yea my first 5e game on roll20 the whole party was human, a few caves and night time encounters later and I have not seen a non-darkvision race since. When the human rogue went to sneak and suddenly realized lighting a torch to see makes scouting alone dangerous the players realized how much hand waving we used to do.Something interesting about mapping on VTTs is the recent implementation of lighting/line of sight and how punishing those features are going to be until players adapt.
I know for a fact that, in many cases, lighting in dark areas and LoS gets hand waved, forgotten, or have their impact minimized. However, now that there's an easy way to account for it, players are finding out that shit gets A LOT harder when you're in the dark and can't see shit. Not to mention, no longer having the luxury of the video-gamey top-down view of an entire battlefield giving them perfect information.
As I said in a couple posts up, last night my 5e group got ambushed as they crossed a river-bridge. They were perplexed (maybe even skeptical?) that they were unable to see their ambushers in the treeline. Perplexed, despite the fact that it was at night, the forest was exceptionally dense (not new information for them) and they had ONE torch lit that didn't quite have enough range to illuminate the treeline. They could see a bit of movement, but couldn't identify any targets from their position on the bridge (kinda the point of an ambush, right?). Well-excecuted ambushes are extraordinarily deadly, but I cut them a few breaks because we had just added two new players to the group and we've still got one struggling with the platform and having a few issues grasping the tactical consequences of his choices. It's only fair to give them some time to figure each other out.
I know the way the ambush played out irritated them, but it is what it is. I mean, go stand in the middle of a dense forest with a thick canopy where very little moonlight (if there is any) penetrates, light a torch, and tell me what you can see....Pro-tip: You won't be able to see much at all. Torches aren't high powered flashlights, not that it would make much difference if they were because of the dense vegetation.
That said, D&D is a game and the point is to have fun so the rules don't exactly reflect reality and I'm glad they don't, but darkness and obstacles that interfere with sight are a real problem. The only difference is that now we're able to keep track of those obstacles effectively.
Oh, and I forgot to mention -- 4 of the 5 party members are Humans (Feats =P) so they're inherently blind as shit in the dark.