The easiset way to do it IMHO would probably be to get your map image set up and then insert it into the map layer of your VTT which will likely have a grid overlay by default.
Grid overlay is a must, as well as adding our own assets to the map. But no worries, we have stickers!! I I love Beyond and DnD, but the decisions made by the MAPS developers are simply unrealistic and far removed from the competition
I map overlay is not a "must." If they add it great! But most maps I import already have one or I make myself and have grid or not depending on my want.
I like the simplicity of upload a map Vs have to go through all the aligning of the grid stuff I do on other maps. I'd rather them work on more creative things like Stickers so we can add things to progenerated maps more easily. (Remember this is developed to be used in tandem with WTOC products that generally already have map grids for the maps in books.
I map overlay is not a "must." If they add it great! But most maps I import already have one or I make myself and have grid or not depending on my want.
I like the simplicity of upload a map Vs have to go through all the aligning of the grid stuff I do on other maps. I'd rather them work on more creative things like Stickers so we can add things to progenerated maps more easily. (Remember this is developed to be used in tandem with WTOC products that generally already have map grids for the maps in books.
For simplicity and easy to use, Owlbear rodeo. There you can use gridded maps or not gridded and add the grid with a click. Maps is easy but lacks of many important features. Simplicity doesn’t mean you cannot have several
I map overlay is not a "must." If they add it great! But most maps I import already have one or I make myself and have grid or not depending on my want.
I like the simplicity of upload a map Vs have to go through all the aligning of the grid stuff I do on other maps. I'd rather them work on more creative things like Stickers so we can add things to progenerated maps more easily. (Remember this is developed to be used in tandem with WTOC products that generally already have map grids for the maps in books.
absolutely a must for playing in person and the millions of maps already made that don't have a grid.
I map overlay is not a "must." If they add it great! But most maps I import already have one or I make myself and have grid or not depending on my want.
I like the simplicity of upload a map Vs have to go through all the aligning of the grid stuff I do on other maps. I'd rather them work on more creative things like Stickers so we can add things to progenerated maps more easily. (Remember this is developed to be used in tandem with WTOC products that generally already have map grids for the maps in books.
absolutely a must for playing in person and the millions of maps already made that don't have a grid.
Can you explain how this is the case? I'm using Maps for in person play almost exclusively now and I don't find a need for a grid (and will actively pick gridless maps over gridded ones)
I map overlay is not a "must." If they add it great! But most maps I import already have one or I make myself and have grid or not depending on my want.
I like the simplicity of upload a map Vs have to go through all the aligning of the grid stuff I do on other maps. I'd rather them work on more creative things like Stickers so we can add things to progenerated maps more easily. (Remember this is developed to be used in tandem with WTOC products that generally already have map grids for the maps in books.
absolutely a must for playing in person and the millions of maps already made that don't have a grid.
Can you explain how this is the case? I'm using Maps for in person play almost exclusively now and I don't find a need for a grid (and will actively pick gridless maps over gridded ones)
Can you explain how it isn't? Are you just using the measure tool every single time someone has to move? D&D has a grid-based combat system, and without a grid, you're stuck measuring each movement. I have five players at my table currently, sometimes more. In-person play sort of depends on speedy combat resolution with any sizeable group.
D&D doesn't have a "grid-based combat system", at least not since or before 4th edition. 4e was literally the only edition of D&D I played with a grid because it was baked into the rules, other than that yeah, I use measuring tools. Also you do know that a grid is just a measuring tool, right? One that restricts movement and options more than "free" movement.
I run D&D for groups of 5-6 on a regular basis with a very tight time restriction (we rent the space), so I'm no stranger to keeping things moving and honestly using a measuring tool doesn't slow things down in any way I've perceived.
You said it yourself, "the millions of maps already made that don't have a grid"—why would these maps omit a grid if it was a necessity to play? This also begs the question what you do if you're playing in person in a situation where a grid isn't possible, for example using terrain models—hills, buildings, ruins etc—where a grid isn't possible?
For example, a grid would not be possible in this setup
Or this one
If you prefer playing on a grid, chase your bliss, but I would not say they're remotely necessary. You can just instead use one of these:
or one of these
or heck, print one of these if you have a 3d printer
That's actually my own design that I made to practice print-in-place hinges, and you can download it for free here: Flexi D&D Ruler 30 to 120 feet
D&D doesn't have a "grid-based combat system", at least not since or before 4th edition.
Fine, it's a "variant" rule, but so are point buy and standard array. Pedantry about "grid-based combat" is unnecessary. The grid is the quickest, simplest way to incorporate distance-based rules in a top-down view, and I'd wager it's the most used form of measurement in D&D when using top-down maps for battle.
I run D&D for groups of 5-6 on a regular basis with a very tight time restriction (we rent the space), so I'm no stranger to keeping things moving and honestly using a measuring tool doesn't slow things down in any way I've perceived.
And we've kept our group going weekly for over thirty years. I don't need your credentials to know that using a measuring tool is slower than counting squares at my table. Will it grind combat to a halt without a grid? No, but for a group of players who's been using one for so long across many different systems, it's an unnecessary change. Additionally, unless I'm missing something, the built-in measurement tool in Beyond's Maps will not show DM measurements on the player window. Breaking out the physical measuring tape seems a bit ridiculous to me, but if it works for you, that's great. Everyone's tables run differently, I just want the tools to run ours how we've always been running it.
You said it yourself, "the millions of maps already made that don't have a grid"—why would these maps omit a grid if it was a necessity to play?
That wasn't actually me that said that, but the point still stands. Some people play with grids, some don't. Some systems use grids, some don't. The answer is easy: adding a grid yourself is better than trying to remove one. There are plenty of tools out there to do this if you need to, and every VTT I've used besides Beyond's Maps has this very basic functionality. It's such an easy, simple thing that I can't figure out why it's not a feature. But when you pop into a reddit thread and drag out a last-minute map that's awesome but gridless, and your group plays with a grid, it would be so much easier if your VTT could do that work for you rather than having to crack open your favorite map editor to do it manually.
This also begs the question what you do if you're playing in person in a situation where a grid isn't possible, for example using terrain models—hills, buildings, ruins etc—where a grid isn't possible?
I imagine that if you're playing with lots of terrain that you can park minis on, a grid just wouldn't work. We don't use them, so it's not an issue for our group.
I was mostly curious to see how you do combat without the grid, and it seems you're using physical rulers. The hinged, 3d-printed ruler you've made seems like a cool idea, if a little wargame-y for my taste. I'm glad that it works at your table. I'd personally prefer that Beyond added an easy-to-implement solution that every other VTT out there seems to have sorted out a long time ago.
All of this makes me think I need to write a small web application that does this for people. I have a wide variety of map creation tools, and NONE of them are as straight forward to do this with an existing, imported map as you'd think. Both Dungeondraft and Wonderdraft are shockingly frustrating to do this in, mainly because asset importing and manipulating is utter trash for this task, even if the grid aspect is really simple. It's pretty easy to do in Inkarnate by importing your image into the brush tool, stamping it on the map, resizing it, and then adding the grid (only if you have the monthly-fee'd pro version) but again... doing all of that and then saving/exporting your new grid'd image? Nowhere near as simple as it would be to just plop your gridless map into Beyond and add a grid.
It's 2025. It's a standard feature. We're not asking for air-conditioned seats here, we're asking for power windows.
It seems you're moving the goalposts a little from "grids are a necessity to play D&D" to "grids are a quality of life improvement for playing D&D". You literally asked me "Can you explain how it isn't?" ("it" referring to grids being an "absolute must for playing in person")
Given this context, me pointing out that D&D 5th edition doesn't have "grid based combat" isn't pedantry, but a valid point when discussing if grids are an "absolute must" for playing D&D.
I would also point out I wasn't "showing my credentials" (which is a very patronizing way to phrase that I must say) but simply pointing out that I'm no stranger to playing D&D on a time budget. I was supporting my opinion with first-hand experience rather than merely fabricating it unfounded.
If you want to say "a grid option will make using Maps in person easier for those who use grids" I would 100% agree. I don't use grids but I cannot and would not disagree with that sentiment. However, that wasn't what was being discussed—it was the necessity of grids for playing D&D using Maps in person. That I disagree with.
Oh, and "a little wargame-y" seems like a bizarre point to make, as if that's somehow a negative. That'd be akin to me saying playing on a grid is "a little boardgame-y for my tastes". It's giving gatekeeping. Also there are loads of wargames that use grids so YMMV
D&D doesn't have a "grid-based combat system", at least not since or before 4th edition. 4e was literally the only edition of D&D I played with a grid because it was baked into the rules, other than that yeah, I use measuring tools. Also you do know that a grid is just a measuring tool, right? One that restricts movement and options more than "free" movement.
While I agree it's not "necessary" for reference page 133 of the 3.5 Players Handbook was the earliest reference of the Battle Grid I know of, though plenty of us used it beforehand. But it was also tied with WOTC/Hasbro starting a line of pre-painted "random loot box" minatures akin to MTG Boosters so I imagine that had more to do with it than system improvements.
I think it's fair to say that distance is a necessary part of D&D combat. Grids are the most efficient and easy means to measure distance. If you don't use grids, you have to use some other tool to measure distance that is likely not as easy or efficient as a grid.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Started playing AD&D in the late 70s and stopped in the mid-80s. Started immersing myself into 5e in 2023
I think it's fair to say that distance is a necessary part of D&D combat. Grids are the most efficient and easy means to measure distance. If you don't use grids, you have to use some other tool to measure distance that is likely not as easy or efficient as a grid.
Question: How is counting squares (I assume that is why you say a grid is the most efficient way) "Easier" than using either a tool in person or online that measures 30feeet? Frankly even when my maps do have a grid online, I see my players using a measuring tool because that is easier to them.
everyone can see the grid. only the measures can see the measuring tool. and if only the measuring tool without a grid is used, there’s always some small amount of ambiguity about distance between any two points
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Started playing AD&D in the late 70s and stopped in the mid-80s. Started immersing myself into 5e in 2023
It seems you're moving the goalposts a little from "grids are a necessity to play D&D" to "grids are a quality of life improvement for playing D&D". You literally asked me "Can you explain how it isn't?" ("it" referring to grids being an "absolute must for playing in person")
If you look back at my posts, I've never said it was "an absolute must," I just agree with the sentiment at my table, because we use a grid. You asked the person who posted that to explain how it was a must, and I presume because he uses a grid, it is a must at his table. I asked how it wasn't because I was genuinely curious how you were measuring distance at a table. It seems tedious to hand-measure distances instead of using a grid, but if it isn't for you, that's great. It's a bridge too far for me and my group, but I'm always willing to try it. I might even print out some of those chains you linked. Could be neat to have with or without a grid.
Oh, and "a little wargame-y" seems like a bizarre point to make, as if that's somehow a negative. That'd be akin to me saying playing on a grid is "a little boardgame-y for my tastes". It's giving gatekeeping. Also there are loads of wargames that use grids so YMMV
This wasn't intended to be "a negative," which is why I qualified it with "for my tastes." I have plenty of Warhammer armies, and I enjoy the format, but I don't prefer D&D combat to be that strategic and slow-paced if I can avoid it. Hand-measuring distances feels like it draws me too much in that direction, which is why it likely isn't an option for our table. I'm not opposed to it, I'm just not convinced it's a solution I'd like to explore.
I'll offer an apology if I'm coming off as gatekeeping or overly defensive. Your posts struck me as the same, so we're probably just both victims of an imperfect form of communication/debate.
I think it's fair to say that distance is a necessary part of D&D combat. Grids are the most efficient and easy means to measure distance. If you don't use grids, you have to use some other tool to measure distance that is likely not as easy or efficient as a grid.
Question: How is counting squares (I assume that is why you say a grid is the most efficient way) "Easier" than using either a tool in person or online that measures 30feeet? Frankly even when my maps do have a grid online, I see my players using a measuring tool because that is easier to them.
In my opinion, the biggest benefit to using a grid is not in measuring movement, but in making positioning clear. For instance, it's obvious which characters are within reach of each other.
I think it's fair to say that distance is a necessary part of D&D combat. Grids are the most efficient and easy means to measure distance. If you don't use grids, you have to use some other tool to measure distance that is likely not as easy or efficient as a grid.
Question: How is counting squares (I assume that is why you say a grid is the most efficient way) "Easier" than using either a tool in person or online that measures 30feeet? Frankly even when my maps do have a grid online, I see my players using a measuring tool because that is easier to them.
Because you don't have to use a tool or other encumbrance to see it. You can literally just glance at the table and know if someone is in Reach. Are they in range of a 30' ranged attack? As long as they're within 6 squares, yes. I can count six squares by the time you've picked up your ruler, let alone actually measured it and decided whether it counts or not. The instance where I would lean towards a ruler is when there are multiple elevations in play. Yeah, you can do Pythagoras on that...but I'd rather just get a ruler out. I'm not sure if that's feasible in VTTs though, or if you're stuck with the Pythagoras again.
Grids basically do the same job as rulers, just they're always visible for everyone and you don't have to mess about with extra tools. You can also standardise things. Rulers' main advantage is that you don't have to have ugly grids visible (my terrain has a grid but blends it into the tiles so it's visible, but doesn't interfere with the beauty of the terrain either, so I get the best of both worlds in that sense.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I think it's fair to say that distance is a necessary part of D&D combat. Grids are the most efficient and easy means to measure distance. If you don't use grids, you have to use some other tool to measure distance that is likely not as easy or efficient as a grid.
Question: How is counting squares (I assume that is why you say a grid is the most efficient way) "Easier" than using either a tool in person or online that measures 30feeet? Frankly even when my maps do have a grid online, I see my players using a measuring tool because that is easier to them.
Because you don't have to use a tool or other encumbrance to see it. You can literally just glance at the table and know if someone is in Reach. Are they in range of a 30' ranged attack? As long as they're within 6 squares, yes. I can count six squares by the time you've picked up your ruler, let alone actually measured it and decided whether it counts or not. The instance where I would lean towards a ruler is when there are multiple elevations in play. Yeah, you can do Pythagoras on that...but I'd rather just get a ruler out. I'm not sure if that's feasible in VTTs though, or if you're stuck with the Pythagoras again.
Grids basically do the same job as rulers, just they're always visible for everyone and you don't have to mess about with extra tools. You can also standardise things. Rulers' main advantage is that you don't have to have ugly grids visible (my terrain has a grid but blends it into the tiles so it's visible, but doesn't interfere with the beauty of the terrain either, so I get the best of both worlds in that sense.
Always visible for everyone does not make something easier, like I said I put girds on my VTT maps and guess what, I see every single one of my players (none of whom are particularly math aficionados) are using the measuring tool in the VTT instead of counting to 6 on the grid. So apparently all these people (two groups of about 12 people in total) all are doing every battle the "Harder" way according to multiple people in the thread. Yes I understand this is "anecdotal" evidence but many in this thread are using what is good for their group as a reference for what is good for everyone. *shrug*
OR
Like many things, the grid is nice but not the end all be all people would like it to be. It might be helpful for "reach of 5 feet" situations, but again if all minis are the same size the rule of thumb of if touching they are in reach so again, easier to see or just as easily without a square grid. Like I said grids are nice, but this thread shows that grids and nongrids get just as much use and neither is better than the other. So no matter what DDB choses to do it will lead to one group being upset. Easier to ask people to add grids on their own, then make others have to remove something they do not want. "It is easier to add then take away" is a general motto when doing most things in life .
And yes, VTTs often give you the option of having a grid or not. The issue is that Maps doesn't - it forces you to use another program to overlay a grid, then come to Maps to play it, or just not use one at all.
Or people could just go to another VTT...and have it do it for you. If your philosophy really is "people should be able to do what they want, have a grid or not, then Maps isn't doing that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Not at all my state more not. The onus on DDB is to provide the option most people want (or a way for those that want it to have it). And DDB provides the option that allows those that want nothing to have it without effort to remove it, while those that want it have to add it. Again better to have a system where someone has to add something than a system where people have to remove something.
I agree that some people want DDB to add the grid option, but again if adding a grid means I have to remove it for my group then I'll be just as annoyed as the group that currently dislikes having no grid option and needs to add it themselves.
However DDB does provide a way to measure on their VTT so they have fulfilled the role of the rules at least.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The easiset way to do it IMHO would probably be to get your map image set up and then insert it into the map layer of your VTT which will likely have a grid overlay by default.
Grid overlay is a must, as well as adding our own assets to the map. But no worries, we have stickers!! I I love Beyond and DnD, but the decisions made by the MAPS developers are simply unrealistic and far removed from the competition
I map overlay is not a "must." If they add it great! But most maps I import already have one or I make myself and have grid or not depending on my want.
I like the simplicity of upload a map Vs have to go through all the aligning of the grid stuff I do on other maps. I'd rather them work on more creative things like Stickers so we can add things to progenerated maps more easily. (Remember this is developed to be used in tandem with WTOC products that generally already have map grids for the maps in books.
For simplicity and easy to use, Owlbear rodeo. There you can use gridded maps or not gridded and add the grid with a click. Maps is easy but lacks of many important features. Simplicity doesn’t mean you cannot have several
options to choose from.
absolutely a must for playing in person and the millions of maps already made that don't have a grid.
Can you explain how this is the case? I'm using Maps for in person play almost exclusively now and I don't find a need for a grid (and will actively pick gridless maps over gridded ones)
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Can you explain how it isn't? Are you just using the measure tool every single time someone has to move? D&D has a grid-based combat system, and without a grid, you're stuck measuring each movement. I have five players at my table currently, sometimes more. In-person play sort of depends on speedy combat resolution with any sizeable group.
D&D doesn't have a "grid-based combat system", at least not since or before 4th edition. 4e was literally the only edition of D&D I played with a grid because it was baked into the rules, other than that yeah, I use measuring tools. Also you do know that a grid is just a measuring tool, right? One that restricts movement and options more than "free" movement.
I run D&D for groups of 5-6 on a regular basis with a very tight time restriction (we rent the space), so I'm no stranger to keeping things moving and honestly using a measuring tool doesn't slow things down in any way I've perceived.
You said it yourself, "the millions of maps already made that don't have a grid"—why would these maps omit a grid if it was a necessity to play? This also begs the question what you do if you're playing in person in a situation where a grid isn't possible, for example using terrain models—hills, buildings, ruins etc—where a grid isn't possible?
For example, a grid would not be possible in this setup
Or this one
If you prefer playing on a grid, chase your bliss, but I would not say they're remotely necessary. You can just instead use one of these:
or one of these
or heck, print one of these if you have a 3d printer
That's actually my own design that I made to practice print-in-place hinges, and you can download it for free here: Flexi D&D Ruler 30 to 120 feet
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
D&D doesn't have a "grid-based combat system", at least not since or before 4th edition.
Fine, it's a "variant" rule, but so are point buy and standard array. Pedantry about "grid-based combat" is unnecessary. The grid is the quickest, simplest way to incorporate distance-based rules in a top-down view, and I'd wager it's the most used form of measurement in D&D when using top-down maps for battle.
I run D&D for groups of 5-6 on a regular basis with a very tight time restriction (we rent the space), so I'm no stranger to keeping things moving and honestly using a measuring tool doesn't slow things down in any way I've perceived.
And we've kept our group going weekly for over thirty years. I don't need your credentials to know that using a measuring tool is slower than counting squares at my table. Will it grind combat to a halt without a grid? No, but for a group of players who's been using one for so long across many different systems, it's an unnecessary change. Additionally, unless I'm missing something, the built-in measurement tool in Beyond's Maps will not show DM measurements on the player window. Breaking out the physical measuring tape seems a bit ridiculous to me, but if it works for you, that's great. Everyone's tables run differently, I just want the tools to run ours how we've always been running it.
You said it yourself, "the millions of maps already made that don't have a grid"—why would these maps omit a grid if it was a necessity to play?
That wasn't actually me that said that, but the point still stands. Some people play with grids, some don't. Some systems use grids, some don't. The answer is easy: adding a grid yourself is better than trying to remove one. There are plenty of tools out there to do this if you need to, and every VTT I've used besides Beyond's Maps has this very basic functionality. It's such an easy, simple thing that I can't figure out why it's not a feature. But when you pop into a reddit thread and drag out a last-minute map that's awesome but gridless, and your group plays with a grid, it would be so much easier if your VTT could do that work for you rather than having to crack open your favorite map editor to do it manually.
This also begs the question what you do if you're playing in person in a situation where a grid isn't possible, for example using terrain models—hills, buildings, ruins etc—where a grid isn't possible?
I imagine that if you're playing with lots of terrain that you can park minis on, a grid just wouldn't work. We don't use them, so it's not an issue for our group.
I was mostly curious to see how you do combat without the grid, and it seems you're using physical rulers. The hinged, 3d-printed ruler you've made seems like a cool idea, if a little wargame-y for my taste. I'm glad that it works at your table. I'd personally prefer that Beyond added an easy-to-implement solution that every other VTT out there seems to have sorted out a long time ago.
All of this makes me think I need to write a small web application that does this for people. I have a wide variety of map creation tools, and NONE of them are as straight forward to do this with an existing, imported map as you'd think. Both Dungeondraft and Wonderdraft are shockingly frustrating to do this in, mainly because asset importing and manipulating is utter trash for this task, even if the grid aspect is really simple. It's pretty easy to do in Inkarnate by importing your image into the brush tool, stamping it on the map, resizing it, and then adding the grid (only if you have the monthly-fee'd pro version) but again... doing all of that and then saving/exporting your new grid'd image? Nowhere near as simple as it would be to just plop your gridless map into Beyond and add a grid.
It's 2025. It's a standard feature. We're not asking for air-conditioned seats here, we're asking for power windows.
It seems you're moving the goalposts a little from "grids are a necessity to play D&D" to "grids are a quality of life improvement for playing D&D". You literally asked me "Can you explain how it isn't?" ("it" referring to grids being an "absolute must for playing in person")
Given this context, me pointing out that D&D 5th edition doesn't have "grid based combat" isn't pedantry, but a valid point when discussing if grids are an "absolute must" for playing D&D.
I would also point out I wasn't "showing my credentials" (which is a very patronizing way to phrase that I must say) but simply pointing out that I'm no stranger to playing D&D on a time budget. I was supporting my opinion with first-hand experience rather than merely fabricating it unfounded.
If you want to say "a grid option will make using Maps in person easier for those who use grids" I would 100% agree. I don't use grids but I cannot and would not disagree with that sentiment. However, that wasn't what was being discussed—it was the necessity of grids for playing D&D using Maps in person. That I disagree with.
Oh, and "a little wargame-y" seems like a bizarre point to make, as if that's somehow a negative. That'd be akin to me saying playing on a grid is "a little boardgame-y for my tastes". It's giving gatekeeping. Also there are loads of wargames that use grids so YMMV
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
While I agree it's not "necessary" for reference page 133 of the 3.5 Players Handbook was the earliest reference of the Battle Grid I know of, though plenty of us used it beforehand. But it was also tied with WOTC/Hasbro starting a line of pre-painted "random loot box" minatures akin to MTG Boosters so I imagine that had more to do with it than system improvements.
I think it's fair to say that distance is a necessary part of D&D combat. Grids are the most efficient and easy means to measure distance. If you don't use grids, you have to use some other tool to measure distance that is likely not as easy or efficient as a grid.
Started playing AD&D in the late 70s and stopped in the mid-80s. Started immersing myself into 5e in 2023
Question: How is counting squares (I assume that is why you say a grid is the most efficient way) "Easier" than using either a tool in person or online that measures 30feeet? Frankly even when my maps do have a grid online, I see my players using a measuring tool because that is easier to them.
everyone can see the grid. only the measures can see the measuring tool. and if only the measuring tool without a grid is used, there’s always some small amount of ambiguity about distance between any two points
Started playing AD&D in the late 70s and stopped in the mid-80s. Started immersing myself into 5e in 2023
It seems you're moving the goalposts a little from "grids are a necessity to play D&D" to "grids are a quality of life improvement for playing D&D". You literally asked me "Can you explain how it isn't?" ("it" referring to grids being an "absolute must for playing in person")
If you look back at my posts, I've never said it was "an absolute must," I just agree with the sentiment at my table, because we use a grid. You asked the person who posted that to explain how it was a must, and I presume because he uses a grid, it is a must at his table. I asked how it wasn't because I was genuinely curious how you were measuring distance at a table. It seems tedious to hand-measure distances instead of using a grid, but if it isn't for you, that's great. It's a bridge too far for me and my group, but I'm always willing to try it. I might even print out some of those chains you linked. Could be neat to have with or without a grid.
Oh, and "a little wargame-y" seems like a bizarre point to make, as if that's somehow a negative. That'd be akin to me saying playing on a grid is "a little boardgame-y for my tastes". It's giving gatekeeping. Also there are loads of wargames that use grids so YMMV
This wasn't intended to be "a negative," which is why I qualified it with "for my tastes." I have plenty of Warhammer armies, and I enjoy the format, but I don't prefer D&D combat to be that strategic and slow-paced if I can avoid it. Hand-measuring distances feels like it draws me too much in that direction, which is why it likely isn't an option for our table. I'm not opposed to it, I'm just not convinced it's a solution I'd like to explore.
I'll offer an apology if I'm coming off as gatekeeping or overly defensive. Your posts struck me as the same, so we're probably just both victims of an imperfect form of communication/debate.
In my opinion, the biggest benefit to using a grid is not in measuring movement, but in making positioning clear. For instance, it's obvious which characters are within reach of each other.
Because you don't have to use a tool or other encumbrance to see it. You can literally just glance at the table and know if someone is in Reach. Are they in range of a 30' ranged attack? As long as they're within 6 squares, yes. I can count six squares by the time you've picked up your ruler, let alone actually measured it and decided whether it counts or not. The instance where I would lean towards a ruler is when there are multiple elevations in play. Yeah, you can do Pythagoras on that...but I'd rather just get a ruler out. I'm not sure if that's feasible in VTTs though, or if you're stuck with the Pythagoras again.
Grids basically do the same job as rulers, just they're always visible for everyone and you don't have to mess about with extra tools. You can also standardise things. Rulers' main advantage is that you don't have to have ugly grids visible (my terrain has a grid but blends it into the tiles so it's visible, but doesn't interfere with the beauty of the terrain either, so I get the best of both worlds in that sense.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Always visible for everyone does not make something easier, like I said I put girds on my VTT maps and guess what, I see every single one of my players (none of whom are particularly math aficionados) are using the measuring tool in the VTT instead of counting to 6 on the grid. So apparently all these people (two groups of about 12 people in total) all are doing every battle the "Harder" way according to multiple people in the thread. Yes I understand this is "anecdotal" evidence but many in this thread are using what is good for their group as a reference for what is good for everyone. *shrug*
OR
Like many things, the grid is nice but not the end all be all people would like it to be. It might be helpful for "reach of 5 feet" situations, but again if all minis are the same size the rule of thumb of if touching they are in reach so again, easier to see or just as easily without a square grid. Like I said grids are nice, but this thread shows that grids and nongrids get just as much use and neither is better than the other. So no matter what DDB choses to do it will lead to one group being upset. Easier to ask people to add grids on their own, then make others have to remove something they do not want. "It is easier to add then take away" is a general motto when doing most things in life .
Minis should never be touching in real life.
And yes, VTTs often give you the option of having a grid or not. The issue is that Maps doesn't - it forces you to use another program to overlay a grid, then come to Maps to play it, or just not use one at all.
Or people could just go to another VTT...and have it do it for you. If your philosophy really is "people should be able to do what they want, have a grid or not, then Maps isn't doing that.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Not at all my state more not. The onus on DDB is to provide the option most people want (or a way for those that want it to have it). And DDB provides the option that allows those that want nothing to have it without effort to remove it, while those that want it have to add it. Again better to have a system where someone has to add something than a system where people have to remove something.
I agree that some people want DDB to add the grid option, but again if adding a grid means I have to remove it for my group then I'll be just as annoyed as the group that currently dislikes having no grid option and needs to add it themselves.
However DDB does provide a way to measure on their VTT so they have fulfilled the role of the rules at least.