(3.5E) Aw, crap...

[seasong]

Realistically, your actions in combat would be affected by what's happening around you. If you're up close and personal with Mr. Ogre and there are five orcs twenty feet off you're going to react differently than you would if it were just you and the ogre.

If D&D were a realistic combat system, sure, I'd agree with you. But in D&D, the most effective tactic is to concentrate firepower on one foe at a time, unless you have an area spell and are far away. If you are far away, the above doesn't apply; if you are meleeing with the ogre, your best chance of success is to lay into the ogre, ignoring the orcs, until it's dead.

Regardless, my point assumes that the 5 orcs are engaged with someone else - if they aren't, they're part of the important details and I will keep them in the flow of description.

 

[SimonMoon5]

What happened to options, not restrictions?

Well, you have the option not to use 3.5e. Yeah, I actually believed them at first when they said it was all about options not restrictions. I assumed that this meant that there would be more options, like "You could use *this* old version of a ranger, or you could use *this* new better version," for example.

This appears not to be the case. The motto is a misprint. It's about restrictions, not options.

 

[SimonMoon5]

And if they change the rule about no facing, that's one I'm going to HAVE to ignore.

Yeah, the new facing rules could get weird, quickly. For example, a horse is now 10' by 10' instead of 5' by 10'. So a horse can no longer fit down a 5' wide passage? Um, sure.

(Of course, maybe the new facing rule takes that sort of thing into account. But I wouldn't bet on it.)

 

[buzz]

Yeah, the new facing rules could get weird, quickly. For example, a horse is now 10' by 10' instead of 5' by 10'. So a horse can no longer fit down a 5' wide passage? Um, sure.

Yeah, like that current rule that says a human can't walk down a 3' wide hallway.

Give me a break. Facing is used in combat. Making creatures like horses have a square facing within the abstracted nature of D&D combat seems simply an effort to make things like adjudicating flanking, movement, and whatnot simpler.

Stop looking for reasons to hate a product that's not even out yet.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

But two horses present a 20' wide front in combat? What was so bad about the facings before?

 

[mystraschosen]

Forgive me for being off topic,but ....Buzz remember me?

You referred me to the game in St. Charles,how ya doing bud?
Good to see you and if you ever have a spot open to play another game,let me know.I play in three and we have a postion open in the Forgotten Realms game.

jarrodzilbeari2002@yahoo.com

 

[buzz]

But two horses present a 20' wide front in combat? What was so bad about the facings before?

And two humans present a 10' wide front in combat? Man, how stupid is that!

It's D&D, dude. If a medium size creature can take up five square feet in the bustle of combat, I can handle a large creature taking up ten square feet. Given the size of an average horse, this seems reasonable within the framework of 3e combat.

I'll be happy to debate this some more once the revised rulebooks come out. Untiul then, it's an exercise in panty-binding.

 

[buzz]

Forgive me for being off topic,but ....Buzz remember me?

Hey! Good to see you on the boards, Jarrod.

 

[Ravellion]

Zander, I don't know where in the UK you are, but if I say such-and-such object is 100 degrees, everyone will assume it is the temperature of boiling water. Perhaps some old pesnioner might not. Everyone under 40 (hey! 99% of the gaming demographic!) will use celsius and look at you funny when you mention Fahrenheit.

Europe has nearly twice the POTENTIAL market of the US, simply because of the larger populaton. That the current market in the US is larger, doesn't mean that you should completely ignore your potential market. I am not saying that Fahrenheit shouldn't be listed int eh DMG, but celsius should MOST definitely be in there. If there is 1 (one, just one!) continental European who used the temperaure rules in the DMG for his arctic/desert campaign for more than 4 sessions, I would be more surprised than hearing 100% infallibel proof that the Pyramids were built by aliens. As spacecraft models.

And Jgbrowning - that link doesn't help at all due to the nature of the Fahrenheit system. Try running an arctic campaign where temperature matters with the Fahrenheit system in the DMG, then converting the temperature every blooming day. I tried it. I decided it was easier to move my campaign 500 miles south on the same continent. Fahrenheit has no, and absolutly no practical basis, unless you grow up with the system. It was a guy who stuck a thermometer up his bum and then decided that that was 100 (and he even did that wrong!), then put another stripe on a completely arbitrary point on the same thermometer and said "That's zero". If there ever comes a reward for success through stupidity, it deserves to go to Fahrenheit postmortum.

Miles? Sure. Feet? Fine. Stones and pounds? Doable. Fahrenheit? ROFLMAO! Yeah, right!

If there is enough market to translate the core books in several different European languages, there is an even larger market for celsius.

Rav

 

[Ravellion]

Actually, consider this sent in the form of an email (with slightly nicer and requesting language) to WotC.

Rav