Diagonal wonkiness scenarios

[HeinorNY]

You say this like it's a negative thing.

It is. It makes you look at fireboxes and see fireballs.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I didn't label anything, I just used a Dimension Line in AutoCad. This precise program made the mesurement, not me.

Explain 1-1-1-1 to it, and get it to try again.

If it still doesn't get it, don't invite it to play 4E with you.

-Hyp.

 

[hong]

It is. It makes you look at fireboxes and see fireballs.

No, it makes you look at fireballs with the bits poking out chopped off for convenience, and still see fireballs.

 

[keterys]

Weirdly, since it's so much faster and easier to understand who gets hit by area effects, you'll never see people do things like lay down Sqwire templates and such... so you -think- about the area less cause they just go 'Okay, I fireball those 3 guys' and move on.

It's pretty cool.

 

[Will]

Keterys, I salute your willingness to try both systems, and regret that you can't take advantage of 1-2-1-2's greater clarity.

I'll try to manage to get by without your respect.

 

[keterys]

Actually... I'm playing with both right now. I assure you that for this group of players, 1-2-1-2 does not have greater clarity. Or, rather, it does in a small set of circumstances and does not in another small set of circumstances.

I even got the math minor war gamer quoted as being ready to switch to 1-1-1-1 and he doesn't even want to play 4e... he's just tired of area templates and the person with 50-80 base move losing count, I suspect.

 

[Will]

I think at that point I'd just use a string.

 

[keterys]

I suppose the actually snarky response would be:
I salute your willingness to stick by your principles and make an uneducated decision on this aspect of the game.

At the point that I'm willing to say that, however, I should drop out of the discussion.

 

[Will]

More seriously, the problem is at least in part that people have different interests and reactions to elements of a game; some people want a lot of immersion, some are focused on tactics, and so on.

So while your experience may be '1-1-1-1 is fine enough, because I can think of the map in terms of rules and tactics and the immersive elements aren't enough to be a problem,' that's ultimately a somewhat personal reaction.

My primary interest in a map is looking down and seeing a rather transparent representation of what's going on. Having to bend my brain to conceive of the map in non-Euclidean space utterly defeats my primary interest in having a map in the first place.

Yes, it works. Yes, it's simple. Yes, it's fast. But it's not a map of the gameworld, it's a map of a tactical rulespace.

And that's tossing out something I'm vitally interested in.

 

[Sir Sebastian Hardin]

More seriously, the problem is at least in part that people have different interests and reactions to elements of a game; some people want a lot of immersion, some are focused on tactics, and so on.

So while your experience may be '1-1-1-1 is fine enough, because I can think of the map in terms of rules and tactics and the immersive elements aren't enough to be a problem,' that's ultimately a somewhat personal reaction.

My primary interest in a map is looking down and seeing a rather transparent representation of what's going on. Having to bend my brain to conceive of the map in non-Euclidean space utterly defeats my primary interest in having a map in the first place.

Yes, it works. Yes, it's simple. Yes, it's fast. But it's not a map of the gameworld, it's a map of a tactical rulespace.

And that's tossing out something I'm vitally interested in.

Heck, yes!
That's my concern too. I'm more an "inmersion" or "character" guy. This is the way many of us play here in Peru. I will try 4e when it comes out to see the whole thing, though.