Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7025330" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, lots of people do lots of things, but 5e STILL has ZERO design features that facilitate TotM. It lacks any system for dividing the stage up into different areas where action takes place, it has no non-grid-dependent means of measuring movement or areas of effect, no rules which define things like zones of control in non-grid-dependent terms, NOTHING. It in fact defines everything in terms of a measurement system which necessarily must assume that you have a precise idea, in X, Y, coordinates, where everything in play is located. Because 5e is so much less tactical in detailed sense than 4e it is very true that simply 'guessing' and not bothering to actually follow the 5e rules on where stuff is and what areas effects cover, etc has less overall effect on how combat plays out. So in that sense 5e is less sensitive in some ways to being played TotM. Casters are still disproportionately advantaged (at most tables, DMs tend to be forgiving creatures) when you play this way, but its no worse (or better really) than playing 2e or 1e the same way. In fact I would say 2e is more ideally suited to TotM than 5e. With its more abstract round-based system and dynamic initiative, coupled with its rules for engagement, missile fire, and casting it actually makes considerable concessions to TotM sorts of play (though it certainly also schizophrenically intrudes many grid-based concepts at the same time). Having played 5e a good bit and used both grids and simply winged it at different times I am thoroughly convinced that 5e's rules pretty much presume there is a grid. You can kinda ignore a bunch of it and it works OK, but having also played 13A, which REALLY IS built for TotM, I can't give 5e any real credit in that department.</blockquote>

Verification