Re: Funny post by one of the WotC D&D Devs

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:01:40 +0100, Jim Davies
<jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On the grave of Tetsubo <tetsubo@xxxxxxxxxxx> is inscribed:

I never used miniatures with either 3.0 or 3.5.

We tried them a couple of times, but it didn't really add anything,
and as often as not it was more of a PITA to lay them out than it was
a benefit.

Not using miniatures did mean that a few feats such as Combat Reflexes
weren't really usable, and flanking and reach needed some rather
ad-hoc rulings, but it worked OK.

The fact that 4E uses abstract measurements such as "squares" bugs the
crap out of me. People don't think in "squares". They think in feet,
yards, miles, etc.

That's not my beef with it. It's more than so many of the powers seem
to involve shifting things around a set number of squares or whatever
that you need miniatures to make half the combat system workable.
Marking and shorter ranges on spells look like they'll make it work.

It may be functional without miniatures, but it doesn't look
promising. I expect to have to HR a whole lot of the movement powers
to make it work.

There is enough DM judgment in the system already that I'd expect that
the moves could just be fudged in a cinematic way. You just hand wave
a bit about the details. You shift the goblin three squares, tell the
DM that you want him to end up next to the rogue and the DM will
either ok it or not. Pretty much like how my groups used to play 1e,
but with more options.

We've already been told that distances and areas of effect are
approximations and a variance of 150% really doesn't matter. We've
been assured that the DM is ok with making judgment calls as needed
for items where there aren't any guidelines in the books. Skipping
minis and a grid and letting the DM adjudicate location and shifting
is not that big a step.

If the description of the encounter has a cliff edge then you tell the
DM at the beginning that you're trying to maneuver the enemies towards
the edge. When you decide to use your power that shifts them over,
just tell him that is what you want to do. No real difference from
previous editions that I can see.

I'm not thrilled with 4e, but there's enough slop in the 4e system
already that ditching the grid and minis doesn't seem like a stretch.
--

Kyle Wilson
email: kylewilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Quadratic elements of GF(p^n)
    ... How do you find the squares in GF? ... If you have a primitive root g handy, the answer is easy - it's ... the even powers of g. ... I am not getting a hadamard matrix. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: how much noise will three 8dB(A) fans make?
    ... square root of the sum of the squares. ... Most noise signals have anything but the same identically same frequency. ... I think you're confusing adding voltages with adding powers. ...
    (rec.audio.pro)
  • Re: Funny post by one of the WotC D&D Devs
    ... Not using miniatures did mean that a few feats such as Combat Reflexes ... People don't think in "squares". ... I expect to have to HR a whole lot of the movement powers ... Jim or Sarah Davies, but probably Jim ...
    (rec.games.frp.dnd)
  • Re: Is 6 the difference of two powers?
    ... powers is dominated by squares. ... All differences of squares are either odd or a multiple of 4. ... differences between a square and a higher power or between two higher ...  So the dominant term of the number of pairs is going to be ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Is 6 the difference of two powers?
    ... I enumerate powers. ... and advance each exponent through bases starting at one. ... But almost all powers are squares, so between pairs of higher powers ...
    (sci.math)