Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="eriktheguy" data-source="post: 5506175" data-attributes="member: 83662">This is a great point. It's in line with a common theme in the 3e/4e simulation debates. 3e claims that it's rules reflect reality better than 4e. 4e points out that 3e's rules don't reflect anything close to reality so it can kindly shut its mouth. Many players that I know who play 3e use battle-maps sparingly. They prefer to occasionally sketch out approximate positions and distances on paper (without a grid). This is far less accurate than using 1-1-1-1 instead of 1-2-1-2.In statistics, we often see two samples with different means. But we know that we cannot claim that the respective populations have different means, because the difference between the samples is small, and the samples do not represent their population perfectly. The difference between a sample and the population it was taken from is much larger than the difference between the two samples.The same is true of D&amp;D editions. The difference between 3e and reality, the difference between 4e and reality, is much larger than the difference between 3e and 4e. Neither of them estimate reality well, so pick the one that's more fun.There is some trouble with 1-1-1-1 in higher dimensions though. A player with a fly speed of 6 can move 6 squares diagonal in 3-D. That's 52 feet of movement instead of 30. And what about when they travel to the far realm and there are four dimensions? Moving from corner to corner of a 4-D hypercube is actually 60 feet. They double their speed when they travel diagonally!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="eriktheguy, post: 5506175, member: 83662"] This is a great point. It's in line with a common theme in the 3e/4e simulation debates. 3e claims that it's rules reflect reality better than 4e. 4e points out that 3e's rules don't reflect anything close to reality so it can kindly shut its mouth. Many players that I know who play 3e use battle-maps sparingly. They prefer to occasionally sketch out approximate positions and distances on paper (without a grid). This is far less accurate than using 1-1-1-1 instead of 1-2-1-2. In statistics, we often see two samples with different means. But we know that we cannot claim that the respective populations have different means, because the difference between the samples is small, and the samples do not represent their population perfectly. The difference between a sample and the population it was taken from is much larger than the difference between the two samples. The same is true of D&D editions. The difference between 3e and reality, the difference between 4e and reality, is much larger than the difference between 3e and 4e. Neither of them estimate reality well, so pick the one that's more fun. There is some trouble with 1-1-1-1 in higher dimensions though. A player with a fly speed of 6 can move 6 squares diagonal in 3-D. That's 52 feet of movement instead of 30. And what about when they travel to the far realm and there are four dimensions? Moving from corner to corner of a 4-D hypercube is actually 60 feet. They double their speed when they travel diagonally! [/QUOTE]

Verification