My group is heavy on the theater of the mind play. When combat comes around, I have my players put their d20 on the table to represent their characters. Then I use all my different die to show where everything is and go from there. I'm probably going to use index cards now to help distinguish the different areas they are in now! I love that idea. I HATE trying to set up those big clunky terrain pieces and would just rather use whatever's in my kitchen to set my big encounters up with. And I would definitely have a rule to where the GM can have an advantageous or detrimental effect to any of the zones.
Glad you are into that! Yeah, honestly I haven’t tried it yet. FATE utilized index cards a ton, but mostly for throwing down new Aspects, and they used Zones for combat but they didnt combine the 2. I like the idea of them combined!
Again, a lot to unpack. First thought is that each zone might optional have a single defining feature. For instance using the tavern example, one of the cards could be the bar, one could be the stairs. This is a quick and easy way to add some color. Maybe some thing tactical. I was toying with a similar system, but yours was more in focus. The ideas was to place cards between the area the player was in to show how terrain between targets modified your chances. Your target was in the woods, add a forest card (visual +1). Thick forest, add a second card. It also shows how much more time it takes to close distance in rough terrain; two cards worth of movement.
Totally agree and love the idea that zones could be smaller things (like the stairs themselves are a zone), and complete agree with and love the idea that zones might have distinct modifiers associated with them based on what they mean tactically. If you are on the Upper deck “zone” and you shoot at someone on the Ground Floor “zone” you get +’s, etc. Or if on the wooded zone then targets that are a short distance or long distance have difficulty targeting you from range.
I think zoned combat based off what professor dungeon master does with his UDT is easier to grasp. Maybe add another layer/distance or quadrants if you want a bit more granularity.
I will look more into it, and look up his UDT as well! Thanks for the tip! I’ll probably finish off this play test with the original Zone concept for now (mainly cause i already built 2 characters), but I’ll start to ponder this question for sure!
I think a quadrant middle and outer zone is the way to go. It keeps zones roughly the same size, allows for representing multiple dungeon rooms at the same time, and cleans up the situation where moving all the way around the center zone is "faster" than moving directly through it. I've even considered the possibility of hex zones with 6 mid zones and 12 outer zones, each 6" across. It would have to be 30" wide but that would fit on a normal dinner table and would allow the zones to be completely in-scale with existing 28mm minis and terrain while still speeding up play.
I was just reading on zones for my own ttrpg research! So far I really like the way 13th ages allows placing yourself behind allies so they can intercept other trying to rush to you. I feel like being able to act as bodyguard brings back some of the "battle formations" tactics from grid based games. (Also as a GM I'd hate to have no way to keep the lich behind its minions.) I say this but I have no idea if Fate also has that feature :|
I totally get that with the idea of Battle Formations, and being “behind lines”. I think that we can make that work thematically with these zones, it just might be initially weird to visualize. It won;’t look like a line for instance, but you could have something like. If the Defender is in a zone with other monsters, those monsters can’t go into the Short Distance location if the Defender has ability X. The ability lets him keep 2 monsters or X monsters from leaving the zone. So now you could have a caster or short range character in that short distance space. That make sense?
@@jfacegames7354 That could work as an ability for sure. It would allow a single character to limit the movements of more than one creature and it would be simpler than figuring out spatial relations within the zone. That being said engagement does a comparable job so maybe it could be an ability that allows you to engage more than one creature at once? In 13th age they need a rule for being behind allies in the same zone but I think having that short distance space or a second zone is most likely cleaner. You would probably still need a way to prevent using 3 actions to move from one edge of a zone full of monsters to the other without risking engagement?
Excellent. So at this point I think you can engage as many enemies as you can touch, haha. So you could be engaged with multiple people. The ability then could allow you them not to leave, and maybe a different ability being that even if they arent engaged they can’t leave your zone, etc. For the free movements, and monsters being able to stop people I think that becomes the fun of one off rules that “break” the rules. I think 4e does this so well, that so many monster abilities just auto work, no save, but it adds so much theme! So when making a Giant land octopus monster, or something you just have an auto ability that if someone gets short distance away it automatically yanks it in and engages it! Or some other odd surprises for the players. That being said I want the base movement to be simple through the zones and to create the one off rule breaks as those areas come up for specific powers or monsters. That’s my initial thought. Love the feedback, buddy!
How would you handle a weapon like a spear? Something with reach. Would it be able to theoretically hit anything in a zone? Does that help define the approximate size of the zone?
Yeah, I think a spear would hit everything in a zone. Now I’ll spit ball. Maybe…Reach allows you to hit things that are a short distance (just outside and adjacent to the zone). But I would think that is shortbows and thrown weapons. So maybe instead a spear has Prod or something like that, and instead it makes it harder for people to Engage you, because you can keep them at bay a bit
@@jfacegames7354 perhaps allow you to attack from behind a friendly. That way you can have the beginnings of a formation. Again had a pretty simple range band system. Might say the first few bands are on the card (touching, near, other) and the each other card is a range band.
if you are using zones you are already deciding to eschew the sort of granularity that would differentiate between, say, a 5ft weapon range and a 10ft weapon range. So, the answer is: you don't represent reach weapons at all.
![BabyChiefDoit - Too Slow (feat. STAR BANDZ) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zayaxws7RPg/mqdefault.jpg)
My group is heavy on the theater of the mind play. When combat comes around, I have my players put their d20 on the table to represent their characters. Then I use all my different die to show where everything is and go from there. I'm probably going to use index cards now to help distinguish the different areas they are in now! I love that idea. I HATE trying to set up those big clunky terrain pieces and would just rather use whatever's in my kitchen to set my big encounters up with. And I would definitely have a rule to where the GM can have an advantageous or detrimental effect to any of the zones.
Glad you are into that! Yeah, honestly I haven’t tried it yet. FATE utilized index cards a ton, but mostly for throwing down new Aspects, and they used Zones for combat but they didnt combine the 2. I like the idea of them combined!
Again, a lot to unpack. First thought is that each zone might optional have a single defining feature. For instance using the tavern example, one of the cards could be the bar, one could be the stairs. This is a quick and easy way to add some color. Maybe some thing tactical.
I was toying with a similar system, but yours was more in focus. The ideas was to place cards between the area the player was in to show how terrain between targets modified your chances. Your target was in the woods, add a forest card (visual +1). Thick forest, add a second card. It also shows how much more time it takes to close distance in rough terrain; two cards worth of movement.
Totally agree and love the idea that zones could be smaller things (like the stairs themselves are a zone), and complete agree with and love the idea that zones might have distinct modifiers associated with them based on what they mean tactically. If you are on the Upper deck “zone” and you shoot at someone on the Ground Floor “zone” you get +’s, etc. Or if on the wooded zone then targets that are a short distance or long distance have difficulty targeting you from range.
I think zoned combat based off what professor dungeon master does with his UDT is easier to grasp. Maybe add another layer/distance or quadrants if you want a bit more granularity.
I will look more into it, and look up his UDT as well! Thanks for the tip! I’ll probably finish off this play test with the original Zone concept for now (mainly cause i already built 2 characters), but I’ll start to ponder this question for sure!
I think a quadrant middle and outer zone is the way to go. It keeps zones roughly the same size, allows for representing multiple dungeon rooms at the same time, and cleans up the situation where moving all the way around the center zone is "faster" than moving directly through it.
I've even considered the possibility of hex zones with 6 mid zones and 12 outer zones, each 6" across. It would have to be 30" wide but that would fit on a normal dinner table and would allow the zones to be completely in-scale with existing 28mm minis and terrain while still speeding up play.
I was just reading on zones for my own ttrpg research! So far I really like the way 13th ages allows placing yourself behind allies so they can intercept other trying to rush to you. I feel like being able to act as bodyguard brings back some of the "battle formations" tactics from grid based games.
(Also as a GM I'd hate to have no way to keep the lich behind its minions.)
I say this but I have no idea if Fate also has that feature :|
I totally get that with the idea of Battle Formations, and being “behind lines”. I think that we can make that work thematically with these zones, it just might be initially weird to visualize. It won;’t look like a line for instance, but you could have something like.
If the Defender is in a zone with other monsters, those monsters can’t go into the Short Distance location if the Defender has ability X. The ability lets him keep 2 monsters or X monsters from leaving the zone.
So now you could have a caster or short range character in that short distance space.
That make sense?
@@jfacegames7354 That could work as an ability for sure. It would allow a single character to limit the movements of more than one creature and it would be simpler than figuring out spatial relations within the zone. That being said engagement does a comparable job so maybe it could be an ability that allows you to engage more than one creature at once?
In 13th age they need a rule for being behind allies in the same zone but I think having that short distance space or a second zone is most likely cleaner. You would probably still need a way to prevent using 3 actions to move from one edge of a zone full of monsters to the other without risking engagement?
Excellent. So at this point I think you can engage as many enemies as you can touch, haha. So you could be engaged with multiple people. The ability then could allow you them not to leave, and maybe a different ability being that even if they arent engaged they can’t leave your zone, etc.
For the free movements, and monsters being able to stop people I think that becomes the fun of one off rules that “break” the rules. I think 4e does this so well, that so many monster abilities just auto work, no save, but it adds so much theme! So when making a Giant land octopus monster, or something you just have an auto ability that if someone gets short distance away it automatically yanks it in and engages it! Or some other odd surprises for the players.
That being said I want the base movement to be simple through the zones and to create the one off rule breaks as those areas come up for specific powers or monsters. That’s my initial thought. Love the feedback, buddy!
How would you handle a weapon like a spear? Something with reach. Would it be able to theoretically hit anything in a zone? Does that help define the approximate size of the zone?
Yeah, I think a spear would hit everything in a zone. Now I’ll spit ball.
Maybe…Reach allows you to hit things that are a short distance (just outside and adjacent to the zone). But I would think that is shortbows and thrown weapons. So maybe instead a spear has Prod or something like that, and instead it makes it harder for people to Engage you, because you can keep them at bay a bit
@@jfacegames7354 perhaps allow you to attack from behind a friendly. That way you can have the beginnings of a formation.
Again had a pretty simple range band system. Might say the first few bands are on the card (touching, near, other) and the each other card is a range band.
Spears/ reach weapons could grant a free/ aoo on foes trying to engage. Just an idea
Appreciate it, Lucas! I’m definitely going to do something similar, just have no idea how AoO’s will work yet in the system
if you are using zones you are already deciding to eschew the sort of granularity that would differentiate between, say, a 5ft weapon range and a 10ft weapon range. So, the answer is: you don't represent reach weapons at all.