Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4053877" data-attributes="member: 2011">You made an error on your 15 foot cone. It has 7 squares, not 8 (DMG pg. 307).Also, it is unfortunate that like the 1 1 1 1 rule, WotC screwed up the 30 foot cone. It should be:OOOOOOOOOOOOXXXOOOOXXXXXXXOOXXXXXXXOOOXXXXXOOOOOXXXOOOOOOOXOOOOOOOOCOOOOwhere C is the caster. This would result in 28 squares compared to the 30 squares of the diagonal cone.The problem with WotC's cones is that they do not follow the same rules. For example, the 15 foot orthogonal cone starts in the center of the square whereas the 30 foot orthogonal cone starts at the vertex of the square.That makes the 30 and 60 foot cones too wide. And yes, it is annoying that WotC did not come up with better cones.But, the reason they did it that way is that they wanted 4 90 degree diagonal cones or 4 90 degree orthogonal cones to make up the equivalent of a spread (course, this failed for their 15 foot cone).This would allow someone to use 4 cone templates to make up a single spread of the same size. Course, this is silly. But, that did not stop WotC from doing it that way.It's much easier for the 30 foot orthogonal cone to remember 1 3 5 7 5 3 (which does not have a break in the pattern) than it is 2 6 8 6 4 2.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 4053877, member: 2011"] You made an error on your 15 foot cone. It has 7 squares, not 8 (DMG pg. 307). Also, it is unfortunate that like the 1 1 1 1 rule, WotC screwed up the 30 foot cone. It should be: OOOOOOOOO OOOXXXOOO OXXXXXXXO OXXXXXXXO OOXXXXXOO OOOXXXOOO OOOOXOOOO OOOOCOOOO where C is the caster. This would result in 28 squares compared to the 30 squares of the diagonal cone. The problem with WotC's cones is that they do not follow the same rules. For example, the 15 foot orthogonal cone starts in the center of the square whereas the 30 foot orthogonal cone starts at the vertex of the square. That makes the 30 and 60 foot cones too wide. And yes, it is annoying that WotC did not come up with better cones. But, the reason they did it that way is that they wanted 4 90 degree diagonal cones or 4 90 degree orthogonal cones to make up the equivalent of a spread (course, this failed for their 15 foot cone). This would allow someone to use 4 cone templates to make up a single spread of the same size. Course, this is silly. But, that did not stop WotC from doing it that way. It's much easier for the 30 foot orthogonal cone to remember 1 3 5 7 5 3 (which does not have a break in the pattern) than it is 2 6 8 6 4 2. [/QUOTE]

Verification