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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Geron Raveneye" data-source="post: 4073714" data-attributes="member: 2268">I don't know how versed you are in the details of classic movement rates...Basic D&D gave movement rates in the form of 120'(40'), which meant "120 feet per turn dungeon movement rate, 40 feet per round encounter movement rate". Note that all movement rates were given in feet, not in inches (I wonder if you get that from AD&D...got to check). Overland movement rate was simply triple your indoors movement rate. If you want a "simple" explanation, assume dungeons were viewed as "difficult terrain" that reduced your movement rate to 1/3rd.And yes, the option to move in yards was there...it was called DM's fiat, and would (in my game) have led to a loss of chances to check for traps before activating them, chances to notice hidden adversaries, secret doors, etc. You also would have warned more monsters up ahead in the dungeon, since moving three times faster causes more noise, which carries a lot better in a dungeon hallway. And yes, sorry, Basic D&D was expressively a game that left options like this to the DM. But at least it DID leave them to the DM. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Nope. Want to know why? I'm sure you're practically burning to hear it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> IF you take inches and translate them to feet indoors and yards outdoors, and explain it with the different circumstances of the surroundings, all you're doing is using a sort of "map scale" to describe to different movement conditions with one number. You might disagree with the condition importance, or the scale, but in all other respects, it conforms to standard geometric and physical understanding. And as I pointed out, Basic D&D didn't use inches at all, everything was given in feet, overland movement was tripled.Edit: I see that AD&D 1E indeed used an "inch=feet/yard" scale to describe movement. Add another thing to the heap of "learned useless information" <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /> If I'd accept that square can mean 5 feet orthogonally and 7 feet diagonally, I would also accept that a character moves faster in one direction than in the one at a 45° angle. And nothing he could try would change that...everything affecting a character's movement speed  (in squares per round) would equally increase the speed differences of both directions. So one direction penalizes movement, and this is a direct effect of a property of the world you move in. And that simply doesn't work with me if D&D is supposed to describe a similar reality to the one I live in. If it works for you, fine. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification