D&D General D&D isn't a simulation game, so what is???

[EzekielRaiden]

This is kind of like the advertisements for aspirin that showed brand X takes effect 30% faster. What they don't show is that both take effect within 10 seconds. Make the circle small enough and extend it as far as possible so it overlaps the thick grid lines and ignore larger areas of effect. Also assume any square that has half it's volume filled is fully affected which is the opposite of the general rule.

When I do it? It looks a lot like:
View attachment 155573
Are those squares that have less than half filled considered affected? I would say no. I would have to thicken my grid lines and then extend the circle to the outside edge of the grid line like you did to even make it close.

Or take a look at a circle that actually has the same size as a fireballView attachment 155575

Those squares at the corners aren't even touched, much less several squares that only have a tiny portion included.

On the other hand if you want to use non-euclidean geometry, feel free. It's one of the options listed.

And yet notice, this 4 tile radius circle misses all of four squares. So all that extra calculation and realism causes you to not touch 4/64 = 1/16th of the squares on this grid. Even if we do the yet further effort of only counting squares that are mostly covered by the circle (more than 50%), it's still only losing 12/64 = 3/16 =0.1875 of the area of the square (or, if you prefer, the square only gains 64/52-1 = 23% area over the circle at max).

Even if this were a 60' (rather, 12 square) radius, the largest typical spell radius (from what I can tell, all of two spells have meaningful radii beyond this, so I'm comfortable treating them as unimportant), you'd still have a net difference of about 25% more area (it will vacillate around that point because the ratio of "circle of radius R" to "square of side length 2R" is exactly 4/π or about 1.27, but the lossy compression of the squares causes it to sometimes exceed and sometimes fall short). So with all that extra effort, you hit...slightly less area, because those 116 "corner" squares are so impactful compared to the 460 "in the circle" squares...after the ten minutes spent hemming and hawing about where to drop the AoE so it hits the most targets.

But we definitely need those rules to get out of the way! That's super important, after all. If the rules forced us to work through a long adjudication process that would totally wreck the experience.

 

[Oofta]

And yet notice, this 4 tile radius circle misses all of four squares. So all that extra calculation and realism causes you to not touch 4/64 = 1/16th of the squares on this grid. Even if we do the yet further effort of only counting squares that are mostly covered by the circle (more than 50%), it's still only losing 12/64 = 3/16 =0.1875 of the area of the square (or, if you prefer, the square only gains 64/52-1 = 23% area over the circle at max).

Even if this were a 60' (rather, 12 square) radius, the largest typical spell radius (from what I can tell, all of two spells have meaningful radii beyond this, so I'm comfortable treating them as unimportant), you'd still have a net difference of about 25% more area (it will vacillate around that point because the ratio of "circle of radius R" to "square of side length 2R" is exactly 4/π or about 1.27, but the lossy compression of the squares causes it to sometimes exceed and sometimes fall short). So with all that extra effort, you hit...slightly less area, because those 116 "corner" squares are so impactful compared to the 460 "in the circle" squares...after the ten minutes spent hemming and hawing about where to drop the AoE so it hits the most targets.

But we definitely need those rules to get out of the way! That's super important, after all. If the rules forced us to work through a long adjudication process that would totally wreck the experience.

Your point? First, it only hits a small portion of several squares. So I would say (and the rules state) that 12 squares would be unaffected, not 4.

But if you want square fireballs go for it.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Your point? First, it only hits a small portion of several squares. So I would say (and the rules state) that 12 squares would be unaffected, not 4.

But if you want square fireballs go for it.

My point is that, as I recall, you are quite a champion of rules "getting out of the way." That seems rather at odds with a preoccupation with ensuring that a 60' radius spell correctly excludes the 116 corner squares. It's a huge time sink for minimal benefit.

Or to put that a little differently: how often would you say it just so happens that there are two enemies separated by enough space such that they would exactly lie on the diagonal of an 8 by 8 square, maximally far apart? Because that's practically the only time that this fireball issue would ever matter. If they are more than one or two squares off those positions, either the 8 square can't hit them any more than the circle could, or the circle will hit both of them just as well.

 

[Oofta]

My point is that, as I recall, you are quite a champion of rules "getting out of the way." That seems rather at odds with a preoccupation with ensuring that a 60' radius spell correctly excludes the 116 corner squares. It's a huge time sink for minimal benefit.

Or to put that a little differently: how often would you say it just so happens that there are two enemies separated by enough space such that they would exactly lie on the diagonal of an 8 by 8 square, maximally far apart? Because that's practically the only time that this fireball issue would ever matter. If they are more than one or two squares off those positions, either the 8 square can't hit them any more than the circle could, or the circle will hit both of them just as well.

I've stated my preference for fireballs to approximate spheres not cubes. That little bit of simulation accuracy matters to me.

Which was my one and only point. Different people have different expectations about what is "close enough" to work for them. The OP wants battle to be a last resort and thinks that the flight speed of a sparrow carrying a coconut matters*. For me non Euclidean geometry is too far.

*I kid, I kid. Couldn't resist a Monty Python reference.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I've stated my preference for fireballs to approximate spheres not cubes. That little bit of simulation accuracy matters to me.

Then do you also have additional templates extending into the spaces above ground level?

And what happens to every character taller than 5ft who take up multiple spaces now because of your sphere?

 

[Cadence]

Then do you also have additional templates extending into the spaces above ground level?

And what happens to every character taller than 5ft who take up multiple spaces now because of your sphere?

Ooh. Damage based on the number of squares taken up. Go to meter sized shares and have the halflings and gnomes specialize in having the bottom of the spheres start one square off the ground. The possibilities are endless.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Ooh. Damage based on the number of squares taken up. Go to meter sized shares and have the halflings and gnomes specialize in having the bottom of the spheres start one square off the ground. The possibilities are endless.

I don't know what's worse; the simulationism or the lack of Freedom Units.

 

[Oofta]

Then do you also have additional templates extending into the spaces above ground level?

And what happens to every character taller than 5ft who take up multiple spaces now because of your sphere?

Why does any of this matter? We all have preferences. Why get your grundys in a bundle because I happen to have a different preference? I'm not the one going out of my way to draw a misleading diagram.

 

[pemerton]

If anyone want to check out Legend it is currently $1 on drivethru

Thanks. I just picked it up!

 

[pemerton]

Should there be saving throw mods on the dex saves for those on the edges?

If you answer "yes", your intuitions are simulationist!

If you answer "no, because we learn that you were near the edge if you make your save" then your intuitions are leaning towards fortune-in-the-middle resolution.

Needless to say, in RM and HARP the attack roll from a fireball gets a bonus against a character dead in the middle of the blast!

EDIT: Just saw this post:

No, but the creature in the center should have disadvantage.

You really need to try RM or HARP!