Mordenthral said:

Using shouting distance as a unit of measurement is just as arbitrary and subject to different interpretations. Froo suggested earlier in the thread that scaling down from 25mm to 6mm would be a solution. It's not one that I'm particularly keen on, given the time I've already spent assembling 25mm scale minis and terrain, but it would work.

Thus far, Emirikol's suggestion for moving all the components to a character sheet looks like the best solution for me. But first I'll wait and see how the Gathering Storm combat encounters look. They might not have as much going on as I normally do in my combats, in which case the RAW movement system could be serviceable.

P.S. by "full circle" I was referring to my original issue with the movement system, not the OP's.

Herr Arnulfe said:

And yet on what dice they occur on can also help you out with the narration - eg, say you got several banes on misfotune dice even though you rolled several challenge dice too, then the factors contributing to the additional misfortune (perhaps it was a darkened hallway) can be used to narrate why certain negative effects were triggered on cards, rather than calling it a plain net failure.

Conversely (using the same example) if the net failure contained banes that appear on both the challenge and misfortune dice, even though the net result is the same, the circumstances are different and you can narrate it as such.

See, with this kind of system, you can drill down that level of information or not. It's your choice, but the tools are there for your use.

Herr Arnulfe said:

I've been thinking about this because I do agree that this is what happens. I've come up with a solution though - I'll be printing out onto cardstock for my group.

Basically I'm creating a ring that goes around the stance meter that has the ranges printed around the edges in the various quadrants, something like a dial. That way, when I'm in close range, I just turn the dial to close range and its done.

The only modification I'd be needing to do on my stance rings is that they're going to need something to point to the current range and also to let me know what location this in regards too (dual purpose).

I'm thinking of cutting out some small triangles to serve as arrows out of white sticker material and place them on the rings - that way it can be removed later if needed.

froo said:

Close range to what, though? I rarely see combats where each side advances in formed units. Usually there are missile troops hanging back, flankers, retreaters etc. You'd need a system that could indicate ranges to multiple combatants at the same time.

froo said:

That's true. We never got into that level of dice analysis in combat because we wanted to keep the pace up, so we just made up cool descriptions freeform, but I suppose it's there for people who want to use it.

The abstract movement was at first a big shock for me too and I agree thats it not very wise to give no attention to groups that love there Battle Maps. But put only a yard figure to the distances and you can play it with the rules easyly.

youcan apply the normal manouever rules. Any terrain modification you can represent much better with the dice mechanic than ever before.

I took some colored glass beads that I have (from prototyping board games) and use colors instead of chit number to relate distance. It cuts down on the number on the table. I use green=close, yellow=med, red=long, blue=extreme (though we may switch the last two).

HedgeWizard said:

I gave beads a thought then I went to fatigue makers since running just ment you were going to pick them up and add them to your sheet anyhoo.

Ahhh... good point!

Ekek said:

Yea i am dumping the abstract movement system. This does not work when in dungeons. You can use it for outdoor stuff.

Militarywizard said:

Why not?

The last time I checked in doors had distances...

The only thing is that it would be more short ranges, and a seldom time medium ranges before someone was close.

One thing thats good to do inside in ""dungeons"" is let the players write up a map of their own as they progress based on narrative rpg'ing. Then they will get a good feel of locations based on imaginations.

Otherwise I almost always have used abstract or narrative only movement, as drawing maps, or making model terrain takes up to much time from actually prepping a good story. Those things i do for my miniature wargaming. Hex/grid based combat have always been the problem for me with DnD and the like, hogs down the game.

Something I learned from a vary good game designer when using maps was: Battle is a flurry of movement and a full focus on opponents, terrain and other things around is something you usually never notice in the heat of the battle if its not right where you are fighting.
What was suggested was, make a fast map right before the battle starts up, draw where everybody is and then start the fight. Only those that took time to get a view of the area - or times in the fight where it gets somewhat calmer - would The GM draw out the new positions on where everybody was on the players descriptions. Also, the map would not be on the table before moments like those, only in the beginning to get a view and then later to get the details if someone had taken their time.
Learning to use ones imagination is a hell of a good exercise and would in the long run give more excitement as each gets to have their own "imago" of whats happening.