Mad about Maps Options

[Androcomputus]

How important are maps, even on the tactical level in your games?

[Blade]

What I don't like with maps is that they often switch the player's mind from "RPG" to "tactical boardgame".
Because of this, I try to avoid maps and rely on description (describing only what the PC actually sees) as much as possible. When it becomes too complex, I draw a very vague map but still rely more on the description than on the map.

[Thanee]

I like to have a rough map at least to describe a scene, in order to have everyone on a level as to what is where.

But not going as far as putting actual minis on a map to show everyone's position; just having a layout of the place.

Bye
Thanee

[Warlordtheft]

I pull out maps every other session or so for heavy combat. The main reason is that it is easier to show the relative positions of the combatants than describe them. THat being said, some time combat is a no brainer (a 1 IP firefight), othertimes the situation is easily explained so no maps are needed.

[Semerkhet]

I don't pull out the battlemat for small fights, but I do pull it out for larger ones. I've got a character whose entire schtick is mobility and the map and minis help him visualize and describe his acrobatics. He's also a remote player, so I'm experimenting with the RP Tools Maptool.

[sinthalix]

My group loves maps...it cuts down on disagreements based on misunderstandings.

[Semerkhet]

What I don't like with maps is that they often switch the player's mind from "RPG" to "tactical boardgame".

Except that in combat, the game does become more of a tactical boardgame. SR combat rules are fairly 'crunchy.' You can choose to go more narrative in your approach to combat, but the rules are intended to delve into the tactical details. This is one of the things I like about SR; there are plenty of opportunities for role-playing and making elaborate plans but every once in a while you get into a gritty detailed firefight that's all about kicking ass and the luck of the dice.