Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 3737134" data-attributes="member: 3400">Yes and no. There were no grids, per se. The idea was that you'd be looking at miniatures on the tabletop and measuring things with your tape measures. That's what D&D evolved from and that's why ranges for movement, spells, and weapons are all in inches. By the time 1st edition AD&D came out, I expect most people weren't playing with actual miniatures, but the rules still spelled the terms out as if you were.As far as precision goes, the AD&D 1e rules were both less and more precise. They accounted for facing and whether or not someone was on the shield side or not (more precision), and yet less because there were no grid spaces nor vertices to deal with in terms of targeting, lines of sight, etc.That's really not true in the 1e RAW. There are illustrations for how a PC can be surrounded, who gets the shield AC, who gets the rear AC, and the difference between using square vs hex grids. That implies things being pretty static in overall relationship between attacker and defender. That said, there were also rules for shooting into melee that suggested a certain amount of bobbing and weaving since it was unpredictable who the target of the ranged attack would be.If there were anyone who did, I have never encountered them. Tons of rules went out the window, some unpredictably and some quite predictably, from table to table. There may have been some people playing by the RAW initially back when the rules first hit the bookstores, but I expect that most drifted substantially after that.</blockquote>

Verification