Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4853934" data-attributes="member: 22779">Well, I suppose it depends on how long your track was.&nbsp; You couldn't dead run around the corners, but you certainly could on the straight aways.&nbsp; But, in any case, I use run all the time in my games.&nbsp; The party was constantly running away from stuff, or running towards stuff quite often too.&nbsp; I suppose if you played in nothing but dungeon crawls or indoor environments with small rooms, you wouldn't see much running, but, I know I certainly did.And that's where 1-2-1 breaks for me.&nbsp; When the change in rules was announced, I was playing, not DMing, so, I did a bit of an informal study on my group.&nbsp; Watched people moving, placing spell effects and whatnot.&nbsp; Every single session someone made mistakes.&nbsp; Including myself.&nbsp; Not every time, of course, but, it happened at least once a session (try to eyeball a 40 foot cone cast on the orthangonal).&nbsp; So, to me, 1-2-1 isn't more accurate than 1-1-1, simply because it introduces too many mistakes at the table.&nbsp; It's fine if all anyone does is limited to about 30 feet or so.&nbsp; But, as soon as you start dealing with outdoor adventures, mounted combat, mounted flying combat, and large area spell effects, you just get too many mistakes for the added accuracy to matter.I look at it like this.&nbsp; If 1-2-1 was as simple as people say it is, then why are there several template threads on Enworld and why is Steel Esquire still in business?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4853934, member: 22779"] Well, I suppose it depends on how long your track was. You couldn't dead run around the corners, but you certainly could on the straight aways. But, in any case, I use run all the time in my games. The party was constantly running away from stuff, or running towards stuff quite often too. I suppose if you played in nothing but dungeon crawls or indoor environments with small rooms, you wouldn't see much running, but, I know I certainly did. And that's where 1-2-1 breaks for me. When the change in rules was announced, I was playing, not DMing, so, I did a bit of an informal study on my group. Watched people moving, placing spell effects and whatnot. Every single session someone made mistakes. Including myself. Not every time, of course, but, it happened at least once a session (try to eyeball a 40 foot cone cast on the orthangonal). So, to me, 1-2-1 isn't more accurate than 1-1-1, simply because it introduces too many mistakes at the table. It's fine if all anyone does is limited to about 30 feet or so. But, as soon as you start dealing with outdoor adventures, mounted combat, mounted [i]flying[/i] combat, and large area spell effects, you just get too many mistakes for the added accuracy to matter. I look at it like this. If 1-2-1 was as simple as people say it is, then why are there several template threads on Enworld and why is Steel Esquire still in business? [/QUOTE]

Verification