Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jens" data-source="post: 1043565" data-attributes="member: 605">In my previous post, I should probably have made it clearer that I was only referring to the SRD all along to see what its rule would mean. Instead of writing that only a few illustrations were 'corrct', I should probably have specified that they are 'correct by the rules in the SRD' or something like that. I guess I should also find a new PHB and read the rule for myself, even though I believe jgsugden has describe it very well (thanks). How much of a difference is there between the rule and the illustration?By working out the implications of the SRD rule (and apparantly the rule on page 176 of the PHB), I figured that it could better be compared to the PHB illustrations. Contrary to Caliban, I think the SRD/PHB176 rule makes a lot of sense, more than the illustrations and the accompanying text (please correct me if I have misunderstood how it is set up.) But I guess we don't have to agree on what makes sense <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=":)" />The reason I think the illustrations make less sense than the SRD/PHB176 rule is that they seem to give a 'bonus' or windfall area of effect by placing the line so that it follows boundaries or crosses intersections. Imo, it is better to avoid giving an extra benefit in special cases.Jhyrryl,Thanks for a good reply. It made me wonder: Are the squares bounded? I mean, are all edges and corners included? If they are, the squares overlap, and that sounds weird to me. It seems to me that you assume all edges and corners to be included, and that your conclusion would be different without that assumption?[I think that for the squares to be non-overlapping, each can only be 'bounded' on two sides and include two corners. But if a game rule relies on something like that, I don't think it belongs in the game in the first place <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=":)" />.]jgsugden,Thanks for the explanation. You talk about a 'no squares being damaged by a bolt fired along a grid line' problem. Couldn't that just be considered a quirky disadvantage that is *really* easy for the caster to avoid? Afterall, instead of casting *exactly* along the grid line, he can just cast at a slightly different angle, resulting in a row or column of squares being affected.</blockquote>

Verification