Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Skyscraper" data-source="post: 4483708" data-attributes="member: 48518">Since everyone is throwing academic backgrounds around...I did mechanical engineering. There is a concept when you make a product that is called tolerance. Tolerance is how precise you need to be when you cut, say, a flat surface on a metallic cube. If you have a tolerance of 0,001 millemeter on a surface, then that surface's distance from a reference baseline must not vary of more than 0,001 mm.Now if you have two interacting surfaces on moving parts A, B and moving part A surface has a tolerance of 0,001 mm while the moving part B surface has a tolerance of 0,1 mm, then moving part A is uselessly precise in that the imprecisions in moving part B will by far overwhelm those of moving part A. In other words, if you have bumps of 0,1 mm on the moving part B surface, those will be 100 times larger than the largest bumps on the moving part A. You'll not even notice those of mocing part A.Likewise, D&D has many approximations. Diagonal 1:1 movement is one of them. IMO, other approximations influence the game much more than diagonal 1:1 movement. Obvious examples are hit points, damage from weapons, healing, heck it's clear that D&D is not a simulation by any means. I think that refusing to use 1:1 diagonal, while acceptable if it rocks your boat, is being uselessly precise about something that will not change the final product you have since the other approximations are much more important.Sky</blockquote>

Verification