Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6860448" data-attributes="member: 996">It depends on what you're used to visualizing, and how you're used to thinking about things.  If find visualizing how a 5x5x5 cube on a grid intersects with the spaces of creatures on that grid (and in the implied 3D grid above it), with cube and spaces all 'snapping to' the grid easier than visualizing a 15' 90-degree cone interesting with potential targets of different sizes, orientations, and elevations that can be in any position relative to eachother, the (possibly irregular) surface, and the origin of the cone.  I may be unusual in that.  :shrug:OTOH, it's easier than either of those if the effect in question simply 'attacks 1d3 Close enemies,' as in 13A.  Nod. TotM, without anything to facilitate it, simply can't handle the range of things that you might be able to do with some visual aids.  It's a limitation of the style, just as needing a play surface is a limitation of using tokens of some sort, or losing granularity is a limitation of using a grid to simplify the use of a scale with a play surface.</blockquote>