Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7748045" data-attributes="member: 42582">Absolutely. As far as I can tell (not being a literal-minis person, I might be wrong), the difference between minis in the literal sense, and tokens, is purely aesthetic (unless facing matters, I guess, and even then some tokens support facing). It doesn't go to system or approach to play.What I was trying to get at is something like this: in AD&amp;D, engagement in melee is all or nothing, and positioning vs multiple opponents is primarily a function of numbers (the defender being assumed always to bring his/her shield to bear, etc); and so mostly (in my experience) one only needs to track the time needed to close and the range for spells and missiles; and that can be done without minis/tokens.Whereas 4e, with many of a PC's abilities pertaining to fine-grained movement of self and/or others within the melee context, makes positioning within melee very important to resolution, and so strongly invites the use of tokens/minis. (I've run some 4e combats, where the terrain is simple and the main issue is one of separation between combatants, without map and tokens just as I would in AD&amp;D or Rolemaster; but in my experience not many 4e combats have that character.)Where I think a discussion like this could go is (eg): the no-minis approach to AD&amp;D or RM adjudication (are you in range? how long does it take to close?) gives the GM a fair bit of control over those features of resolution, because - typically, I think - it is the GM's &quot;mental map&quot; that is taken as the most canonical for the table, unless someone can point out that s/he has obviously overlooked or misremembered something. The 4e approach makes all those bits of resolution more &quot;objective&quot; or &quot;shared&quot; (take your pick; they may be synonyms, or may not be, but I'm not pushing hard on that at this point!). Does that make 4e &quot;better&quot;? Or &quot;worse&quot;? Is there a reason (eg the stuff in 4e comes up all the time, whereas closing and range in AD&amp;D are more peripheral? are those who use minis/tokens in AD&amp;D trying to achieve more &quot;objectivity&quot;?)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7748045, member: 42582"] Absolutely. As far as I can tell (not being a literal-minis person, I might be wrong), the difference between minis in the literal sense, and tokens, is purely aesthetic (unless facing matters, I guess, and even then some tokens support facing). It doesn't go to system or approach to play. What I was trying to get at is something like this: in AD&D, engagement in melee is all or nothing, and positioning vs multiple opponents is primarily a function of numbers (the defender being assumed always to bring his/her shield to bear, etc); and so mostly (in my experience) one only needs to track the time needed to close and the range for spells and missiles; and that can be done without minis/tokens. Whereas 4e, with many of a PC's abilities pertaining to fine-grained movement of self and/or others within the melee context, makes positioning within melee very important to resolution, and so strongly invites the use of tokens/minis. (I've run some 4e combats, where the terrain is simple and the main issue is one of separation between combatants, without map and tokens just as I would in AD&D or Rolemaster; but in my experience not many 4e combats have that character.) Where I think a discussion like this could go is (eg): the no-minis approach to AD&D or RM adjudication (are you in range? how long does it take to close?) gives the GM a fair bit of control over those features of resolution, because - typically, I think - it is the GM's "mental map" that is taken as the most canonical for the table, unless someone can point out that s/he has obviously overlooked or misremembered something. The 4e approach makes all those bits of resolution more "objective" or "shared" (take your pick; they may be synonyms, or may not be, but I'm not pushing hard on that at this point!). Does that make 4e "better"? Or "worse"? Is there a reason (eg the stuff in 4e comes up all the time, whereas closing and range in AD&D are more peripheral? are those who use minis/tokens in AD&D trying to achieve more "objectivity"?) [/QUOTE]

Verification