Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8609443" data-attributes="member: 6790260">And yet notice, this 4 tile radius circle misses all of four squares. So all that extra calculation and realism causes you to not touch 4/64 = 1/16th of the squares on this grid. Even if we do the yet further effort of only counting squares that are mostly covered by the circle (more than 50%), it's still only losing 12/64 = 3/16 =0.1875 of the area of the square (or, if you prefer, the square only gains 64/52-1 = 23% area over the circle at max).Even if this were a 60' (rather, 12 square) radius, the largest typical spell radius (from what I can tell, all of two spells have meaningful radii beyond this, so I'm comfortable treating them as unimportant), you'd still have a net difference of about 25% more area (it will vacillate around that point because the ratio of &quot;circle of radius R&quot; to &quot;square of side length 2R&quot; is exactly 4/π or about 1.27, but the lossy compression of the squares causes it to sometimes exceed and sometimes fall short). So with all that extra effort, you hit...slightly less area, because those 116 &quot;corner&quot; squares are so impactful compared to the 460 &quot;in the circle&quot; squares...after the ten minutes spent hemming and hawing about where to drop the AoE so it hits the most targets.But we definitely need those rules to get out of the way! That's super important, after all. If the rules forced us to work through a long adjudication process that would totally wreck the experience. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes&nbsp; &nbsp; :rolleyes:"&nbsp; data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8609443, member: 6790260"] And yet notice, this 4 tile radius circle misses all of [I]four squares[/I]. So all that extra calculation and realism causes you to not touch 4/64 = 1/16th of the squares on this grid. Even if we do the yet further effort of only counting squares that are mostly covered by the circle (more than 50%), it's still only losing 12/64 = 3/16 =0.1875 of the area of the square (or, if you prefer, the square only gains 64/52-1 = 23% area over the circle at max). Even if this were a 60' (rather, 12 square) radius, the largest typical spell radius (from what I can tell, all of [I]two[/I] spells have meaningful radii beyond this, so I'm comfortable treating them as unimportant), you'd still have a net difference of about 25% more area (it will vacillate around that point because the ratio of "circle of radius R" to "square of side length 2R" is exactly 4/π or about 1.27, but the lossy compression of the squares causes it to sometimes exceed and sometimes fall short). So with all that extra effort, you hit...slightly less area, because those 116 "corner" squares are so impactful compared to the [I]460[/I] "in the circle" squares...after the ten minutes spent hemming and hawing about where to drop the AoE so it hits the most targets. But we definitely need those rules to get out of the way! That's super important, after all. If the rules forced us to work through a long adjudication process that would totally wreck the experience. :rolleyes: [/QUOTE]

Verification