Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
1 square Diagonal Movement: Reaction from Players
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Thyrwyn" data-source="post: 4062883" data-attributes="member: 12354"><p>Is the basic assumption of this controversy at all refective of reality, though? Isn't the idea that all humans move 30', or 6 squares, or have 6 movement points or whatever arbitrary, flawed and (in some sense) broken? It is <em>fair</em>, in that it treats everyone as 'the same', but that is hardly the way life is. What about reaction time? or indecision? or the fact that a character can cover the same distance in a straight line as one who makes a 90 degree turn? </p><p></p><p>What if we look at the whole process as being representative of far too many variables to be worth tracking (was the character moving in that direction last turn? was he prone? what way was he facing? why can't anyone get in his way? etc. . . ). The same thing applies to distance: why is the 'range' of Point Blank Shot <em>exactly</em> 30' or 6 squares for everyone? why can't it be 32' for some, and 27' for others? does it matter? Why does does someone .001 feet outside the area of effect of a fireball take absolutely no damage, while someone just a little closer gets toasted?</p><p></p><p>Lets look at the rules of the game as a formula for representing "the way things work in the real world" or "the laws of the universe".</p><p></p><p>If we wanted to, we could introduce a Reaction Roll, to see how far you get to move each round; we could give spells and abilities variable ranges and AoE; we could roll for initiative each round; we could do all these things and they would allow us to quantify more of those variables; they would give us the appearance of achieving a closer approximation of reality at the expense of time and effort.</p><p></p><p>The 1-1-1 rule makes a sacrifice in the other direction, it recognizes that there are so many possible random variables - why roll them? Under 1-1-1 movement rules, sometimes you can cover more or less distance than others, or shoot further, or be affected by something you were not as close too - in some ways <em>this is more reflective of reality than the 1-2-1 rule</em>. Rather than die rolls, time, and calculations - it uses the dynamics of the game board. </p><p></p><p>If we were to truly look at situation fom the character's PoV, would they really notice? No - because they don't think in turns and concrete, delineated actions. They do: They don't do: They do: They don't do: </p><p>Life is variable. Combat is variable. Life goes on - and the laws of the universe remain unbroken.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Thyrwyn, post: 4062883, member: 12354"] Is the basic assumption of this controversy at all refective of reality, though? Isn't the idea that all humans move 30', or 6 squares, or have 6 movement points or whatever arbitrary, flawed and (in some sense) broken? It is [i]fair[/i], in that it treats everyone as 'the same', but that is hardly the way life is. What about reaction time? or indecision? or the fact that a character can cover the same distance in a straight line as one who makes a 90 degree turn? What if we look at the whole process as being representative of far too many variables to be worth tracking (was the character moving in that direction last turn? was he prone? what way was he facing? why can't anyone get in his way? etc. . . ). The same thing applies to distance: why is the 'range' of Point Blank Shot [i]exactly[/i] 30' or 6 squares for everyone? why can't it be 32' for some, and 27' for others? does it matter? Why does does someone .001 feet outside the area of effect of a fireball take absolutely no damage, while someone just a little closer gets toasted? Lets look at the rules of the game as a formula for representing "the way things work in the real world" or "the laws of the universe". If we wanted to, we could introduce a Reaction Roll, to see how far you get to move each round; we could give spells and abilities variable ranges and AoE; we could roll for initiative each round; we could do all these things and they would allow us to quantify more of those variables; they would give us the appearance of achieving a closer approximation of reality at the expense of time and effort. The 1-1-1 rule makes a sacrifice in the other direction, it recognizes that there are so many possible random variables - why roll them? Under 1-1-1 movement rules, sometimes you can cover more or less distance than others, or shoot further, or be affected by something you were not as close too - in some ways [I]this is more reflective of reality than the 1-2-1 rule[/I]. Rather than die rolls, time, and calculations - it uses the dynamics of the game board. If we were to truly look at situation fom the character's PoV, would they really notice? No - because they don't think in turns and concrete, delineated actions. They do: They don't do: They do: They don't do: Life is variable. Combat is variable. Life goes on - and the laws of the universe remain unbroken. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
1 square Diagonal Movement: Reaction from Players
Top