Can you do a "diamond" shaped blast?

[Mal Malenkirk]

It does say a square, so all sides would have to have 3 squares. That's not really in question, orientation is.

Your diamond isn't a square. It doesn't have 4 sides, it has 20. Count them.

Hey, if you are going to be litteral...

 

[Dracorat]

I already answered the sides argument, and if we're going to be literal, it'd be 28, not 20.

As for "answer the questions" I will not as they do not apply to what the rules state. Once you can point out that the rules account for X, Y or Columns and Rows, then we will delve in to that.

 

[Ziana]

As for "answer the questions" I will not as they do not apply to what the rules state. Once you can point out that the rules account for X, Y or Columns and Rows, then we will delve in to that.

The rules provide a definition of "3 squares by 3 squares". That entails some necessary logical consequences.

Your refusal to answer just demonstrates your fundamental intellectual dishonesty and the indefensibility of your position.

Please stop wasting people's time and confusing simple issues.

If the rulebooks were written in legalese, pseudocode, or formal symbolic logic, would they be as accessible to gamers? Would they sell as well? Is it necessary for the authors to go that far in order to make the rules understood?

 

[Dracorat]

Ah the snarkiness returns.

I can say the same of your insistence that the rules follow your interpretation of them.

I am wasting no one's time, TYVM.

 

[Torg Smith]

I already answered the sides argument, and if we're going to be literal, it'd be 28, not 20.

As for "answer the questions" I will not as they do not apply to what the rules state. Once you can point out that the rules account for X, Y or Columns and Rows, then we will delve in to that.

I have checked all your posts in this thread and you have not quoted one rule that says the area is a square. In several of your posts you quote the rule that brings into question the whole square concept. The rule on page 272 that states. “A blast fills an area adjacent to you that is a specified number of squares on a side.” Now they make several examples that demonstrate squares with two sides running horizontal and two sides running vertical. If you are using these examples to say that the area must be square as they do not have any non-square areas, then another person can say that the sides must be horizontal and vertical in orientation as they have no examples of diagonal sides.

 

[Ziana]

I am wasting no one's time, TYVM.

You are.

An ideal figure consists of "3 squares by 3 squares". I'm not talking about DnD, battle grids, or anything in the rules. I'm talking about a simple definition. It is a thing that consists of squares, and there are 3 by 3 of them. How many squares are there in one direction? And the other? How many squares are in the first set? The second? The third? If there are any additional squares, which of the sets are they in?

 

[Dracorat]

I'll draw a picture in a bit.

 

[Ziana]

What is the area of a 10x10 burst?
How many squares does it affect?
Does the formula one uses to calculate area differ depending on the "orientation" of the burst?
If so, and one formula always covers significantly more squares than the other, why should a player ever use the lesser orientation?
If "rotating" an area space results in its total area of effect increasing significantly, is this "rotation" mathematically valid?
If a spell or effect is balanced based on one total area, and players are instead using the effect to cover more total area, is game balance preserved?

 

[Dracorat]

What is the area of a 10x10 burst?

ten squares by ten squares.

How many squares does it affect?

ten squares by ten squares.

Does the formula one uses to calculate area differ depending on the "orientation" of the burst?

No, it is still ten squares by ten squares.

If "rotating" an area space results in its total area of effect increasing significantly, is this "rotation" mathematically valid?

It is still ten squares by ten squares.

If a spell or effect is balanced based on one total area, and players are instead using the effect to cover more total area, is game balance preserved?

One could ask the same of an arbitrary decision to make diagonals count as 1 instead of 1.5 but regardless, this is not germane to the issue.

 

[Ziana]

ten squares by ten squares.

Please do not continue to demonstrate your evasiveness and intellectual dishonesty. What is the number?

No, it is still ten squares by ten squares.

Dishonest evasion.

It is still ten squares by ten squares.

Dishonest evasion.