Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6092842" data-attributes="member: 4937">I'm not saying its impossible, because I've done it, but it is conceptually difficult to keep track of everything that is going on without pushing them to completion (and out of memory) one at a time.&nbsp;&nbsp; Instead you end up with a bunch of actions waiting on a mental stack, which, while as you point out is managable is still more complicated than not doing it.&nbsp;&nbsp; Also you can get into situations where you absolutely have to resolve ties, such as:Fighter A announces an attack on Spellcaster B, who is in the same segment completing casting Hold Person, targeting the fighter.&nbsp;&nbsp; Fighter A resolves a hit on Spellcaster B, doing 12 damage and disrupting the spell.Spellcaster B completes his spell and paralyzes Fighter A, who fails his save.But wait, Spellcaster B's spell could never have gone off, because it was disrupted by Fighter A's attack.But wait, Fighter A couldn't have disrupted the spell because he was paralyzed preventing the attack in the first place.Situations like this mean that instead of simultanous actions, you are often simply getting into breaking up rounds into finer and finer gradients.&nbsp; Which, incidently you've already done by dividing the round up into segments.&nbsp; As I said earlier, this has the disadvantage of slowing the game down.Also there are situations where simultaneous resolution raises questions of 'interrupts', which end up causing you to have solve on the fly equations like: &quot;An Ogre at 15&quot; distance with a base move of 12&quot; charges a wizard.&nbsp; 6&quot; away in a different direction, but 13&quot; from the Ogre, a Paladin with the declared action of intercepting the Ogre and placing himself between the Ogre and the Wizard charges the Ogre simultaneously.&nbsp; Can the Paladin reach an intercept point in the Ogres path before the Ogre reaches the Wizard?&nbsp; Once there, what is his position relative to the Ogre, in front, behind, or beside it?&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6092842, member: 4937"] I'm not saying its impossible, because I've done it, but it is conceptually difficult to keep track of everything that is going on without pushing them to completion (and out of memory) one at a time. Instead you end up with a bunch of actions waiting on a mental stack, which, while as you point out is managable is still more complicated than not doing it. Also you can get into situations where you absolutely have to resolve ties, such as: Fighter A announces an attack on Spellcaster B, who is in the same segment completing casting Hold Person, targeting the fighter. Fighter A resolves a hit on Spellcaster B, doing 12 damage and disrupting the spell. Spellcaster B completes his spell and paralyzes Fighter A, who fails his save. But wait, Spellcaster B's spell could never have gone off, because it was disrupted by Fighter A's attack. But wait, Fighter A couldn't have disrupted the spell because he was paralyzed preventing the attack in the first place. Situations like this mean that instead of simultanous actions, you are often simply getting into breaking up rounds into finer and finer gradients. Which, incidently you've already done by dividing the round up into segments. As I said earlier, this has the disadvantage of slowing the game down. Also there are situations where simultaneous resolution raises questions of 'interrupts', which end up causing you to have solve on the fly equations like: "An Ogre at 15" distance with a base move of 12" charges a wizard. 6" away in a different direction, but 13" from the Ogre, a Paladin with the declared action of intercepting the Ogre and placing himself between the Ogre and the Wizard charges the Ogre simultaneously. Can the Paladin reach an intercept point in the Ogres path before the Ogre reaches the Wizard? Once there, what is his position relative to the Ogre, in front, behind, or beside it?" [/QUOTE]

Verification