SRD on Marshes?

[WizarDru]

I was reading the SRD concerning marshes, and I noticed this:

• — Marsh Category —
• Moor Swamp
• Shallow bog 20% 40%
• Deep bog 5% 20%
• Light undergrowth 30% 20%
• Heavy undergrowth 10% 20%

Am I missing why the Moor category of Marsh only totals 65% , or is this a mistake in the SRD?

 

[dcollins]

If I recall, these are independent probability events -- that is, you need to roll for each of these possibilities separately. A swamp space could be both a shallow bog + heavy undergrowth. Or just a deep bog. Or nothing whatsoever (solid ground). The chances aren't exclusive of each other, so they're not meant to add up to 100%.

Check other terrain types and see how frequently they add up to 100%.

As an aside, having tried to use this, I think it's too complicated to formally try using this system on every map space for each encounter. Reminds me of "Wilderness Survival Guide" stuff at the end 1st Ed. which was too unwieldy and highly unlikely that it was every playtested. So too, 3.5 new stuff.

 

[Plane Sailing]

The missing % is ordinary terrain AFAIK. Clear and with no penalties.

 

[WizarDru]

If I recall, these are independent probability events -- that is, you need to roll for each of these possibilities separately. A swamp space could be both a shallow bog + heavy undergrowth. Or just a deep bog. Or nothing whatsoever (solid ground). The chances aren't exclusive of each other, so they're not meant to add up to 100%.

Check other terrain types and see how frequently they add up to 100%.

That appears to be it. Looking at Forests, for example, and a medium forest has a 70% chance for typical trees AND a 70% chance for light undergrowth (and 10% chance of massive trees and 20% chance of heavy undergrowth).

This text prefaces the forest table: "The table below describes in general terms how likely it is that a given square has a terrain element in it." So it's refering to the likelihood of a map square to have that type of terrain within it. However, they never actually define the dimensions of a square, that I can see. Is it subjective to each map, or is there a standard?

 

[Staffan]

So it's refering to the likelihood of a map square to have that type of terrain within it. However, they never actually define the dimensions of a square, that I can see. Is it subjective to each map, or is there a standard?

I would assume they refer to the standard 5' square on a battlemap.

 

[WizarDru]

Battlemaps are tactical. I can't imagine they'd be having you check every 5' square. I'm assuming they're referring to an overland map, but there's no mention (in the SRD, at least) of scale.

EDIT: But then again, maybe you're right, and they're providing rules for battlemap generation. Looking at the marsh rules, they describe bogs as taking two squares of movement to cross a single square....so perhaps this is partly for integration with D&D Miniatures. It's utility seems somewhat limited, at best.

 

[dcollins]

I agree -- that it's meant for each 5 ft. square, and that it's therefore really infeasible to use as written.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Why would anyone waste their time on 5-ft squares? That's madness. The tables are great for determining terrain in the area; just expand it to the entire battlemap and voila, you know the terrain.

Or use the %s to determine what the map looks like. 70% is forest and 30% is marsh? Ok, so 70% of your map is forest and 30% is marsh. Done.

 

[dcollins]

Why would anyone waste their time on 5-ft squares? That's madness.

Ask Andy Collins?

 

[coyote6]

The percentages given aren't for "forest" or "marsh" (those are called "terrains"). Under each terrain, several "terrain features" are listed -- "light undergrowth", "shallow bog", "gradual slope", etc. -- and given game effects. Those features are the things given percentages, and they can apparently co-exist in a single area -- e.g., you have a gradual slope covered in light undergrowth. (Though some combinations would seem odd -- you have light and heavy undergrowth?)

Rolling those percentages for every 5' by 5' area, especially for an outdoor fight in an RPG, would be insane. D&D isn't the D&D Miniatures Skirmish Game; the PCs can and will leave the battleboard, without counting as lost figures. So what do you do when they run off the edge of your carefully crafted map? Start rolling for each square?

Of course, you don't have to roll 'em; you can just use 'em as guidelines.

The terrain stuff in the DMG is a really neat idea that is, IMO, messed up by trying too much to be compatible with the minis game.

The way the least little difficulty in terrain halves your speed, with no intermediate decrease, also annoys me. What, 2/3rds is too hard to figure out? You can use the same chart you do when figuring out reduction in speed due to armor or encumbrance.