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="Korgoth" data-source="post: 4238511" data-attributes="member: 49613">I think it has basically always been an abstraction.  Going back to OD&D and 1E, the combat round was 1 minute long.  Nobody thought that it took 1 minute to swing a sword.  The attack roll didn't represent 1 swing... it represented a minute's worth of attacking.Obviously, the court of public opinion has decided that they basically want one roll per attack, or something close to that.  Classic D&D went this direction early on, and it seems to be the preferred approach.  I like it too.  But even then, D&D has never tried to represent all the feints and jukes and positioning of real combat.  Even in sparring in martial arts you don't just go up to somebody and stand there and wail away... there's some footwork and fakeouts and sizing your opponent up.4E is evidently trying to bring in more of that by deepening the tactical game.  So specific powers will allow shifts, bursts of speed and so on.  I see nothing wrong with that... "exception-based" is pretty much the only workable approach to simulate all of that, because otherwiseyou could never work up a rules set that would allow for it all and still be playable.There's the same thing in historical wargaming.  If you want to play a game with tanks, artillery and men all doing their thing, you have to fudge the distance and time scale or else it becomes incredibly complicated.  And in naval gaming, especially in the Pacific... if you don't fudge the distance (especially relative to the models) you're either going to have to use nanites as minis or you're going to have to rent the Astrodome.</blockquote>

Verification