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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fredramsey" data-source="post: 2392062" data-attributes="member: 20274">It's becaused no one I ever ran into all those years used segments that much, only for spellcasting. It was rounds. And in a round, your average thief or wizard (unencumbered for obvious reasons) could move 2 FEET on the battlemat in a round. No use there.And yes, it was 5' on the battlemat. You can't possible sit there and tell me you drew a 30' x30' dungeon room on a battle map that was 3 1" squares by 3 1" squares. Get out your current mat and try it. One mini per square? No walking two by two down a 10' hall? Nope, never saw anyone in all the years I played 1st Ed & 2nd Ed do that. You couldn't represent the action that way.So no one bothered to move, except to step up to the next opponent, or for area of effect spells. There was no need, no rules to support why you would do that.I think sometimes people view those 1st Edtion days through too much of a nostalgia filter. Gameplay was just not the detailed, tactical affair it is today in 3.x. Large movement rates, in YARDS outdoors. Yards. 6 squares on the battle mat per 1" outdoor scale. And again, using outdoor scale, an unencumbered human could move 72 squares on the battle mat. That's 5 FEET. So, no one playing on any table I can imagine counted out squares in an outdoor fight.Strategic? Yes. But not tactical. 3.x gave us tactical movement. Movement that matters. Knockback/Bull Rush. 5' steps. The whole shebang. I started to create this for 1st Edition myself. I was going to cut the rounds from 1 minute to 10 seconds, use a formula to come up with a squares/round, etc. I just never finished it.</blockquote>

Verification