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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bumamgar" data-source="post: 6353894" data-attributes="member: 38648">Good point.  I also tend to not worry about things to the level of 5' increments, regardless of how the rules are written or the edition we're playing.  To me, the various concepts of facing, 5' steps, precising flanking and positioning are all too simulationist / wargamy to bother with.  Our group much prefers just getting on with the action and the story rather than measuring out movement on a grid.  I still use the various rules for things like disengaging, allies within 5' for sneak attack, etc.  We're just not that precise about it, meaning that generally it is assumed that monsters and characters in melee are within 5' of each other and therefor required to disengage if they want to avoid opportunity attacks, and that unless something specific and unusual is going on, the rogue in a grand melee with allies also in melee is going to be able to get sneak damage every round.  Accordingly, the mage is also pretty much guaranteed to hit their allies with a fireball cast into melee as well.I spent years playing 3.5 and then 4e with precise grid-based combat, and frankly, it just got to be very tedious.  It also led to a lot of what I considered to be cheese (ie: dropping a fireball in melee, but with such precise positioning that it would hit a monster in melee with an ally but not the ally as well)  More time was spent plotting and planning positioning on the battle grid than declaring actual actions.  It also meant combat took forever!  Too each their own, but it's just not a style that our group enjoys.</blockquote>

Verification