I always used to track distances in 2E using a Cartesian grid. I'd pick some arbitrary point to be (0, 0), and write everyone's distances from that arbitrary point as their coordinates.
So if the point I pick is 'the desecrated altar', and the evil priest is (4, 9) while the fighter is (4, 7) and the priest's skeletal minions are (3, 5) and (7, 9) while the wizard is at (-40, 30); a fireball is perfectly safe, it won't hit the wizard and the fighter can take it
That hurt my brain bits . . .
I suppose I'm just the kind of person who needs a mat.
A grid does make for easy concrete visualization, which is, I think, part of the problem Dave is having with it. He wants something that'll force his players to visualize on their own, and communicate that visualization verbally, since he's looking for a more verbal or litteral narrative.
A Cartesian coordinate system would do that, and without sacrificing any of the precision of a grid. It'd be a simple matter of tracking two numbers along with initiative. For instance, if Grond is up, and his position is 3,7 and there's a goblin at 4,7 then he's adjacent to it. If he pushes it 2 to 5,7 or 5,9 or 5,5 (all possible), it's not adjacent anymore. If he has an ally at 5,7 then he's flanking the goblin. Perfectly precise, no need to change the rules, but no 'square counting' or distracting concrete representation, just math.
And, it's not that alien, either. When most of us run 3e combats we just not the altitude of the 3d elements, rather than elevating them to scale above the play surface or anything. That's the same thing - a number representing position - just only along one dimension instead of two. The cartesian system could be extended to handle 3ED, as well.
I always used to track distances in 2E using a Cartesian grid. I'd pick some arbitrary point to be (0, 0), and write everyone's distances from that arbitrary point as their coordinates.
So if the point I pick is 'the desecrated altar', and the evil priest is (4, 9) while the fighter is (4, 7) and the priest's skeletal minions are (3, 5) and (7, 9) while the wizard is at (-40, 30); a fireball is perfectly safe, it won't hit the wizard and the fighter can take it
That hurt my brain bits . . .
I suppose I'm just the kind of person who needs a mat.
A grid does make for easy concrete visualization, which is, I think, part of the problem Dave is having with it. He wants something that'll force his players to visualize on their own, and communicate that visualization verbally, since he's looking for a more verbal or litteral narrative.
A Cartesian coordinate system would do that, and without sacrificing any of the precision of a grid. It'd be a simple matter of tracking two numbers along with initiative. For instance, if Grond is up, and his position is 3,7 and there's a goblin at 4,7 then he's adjacent to it. If he pushes it 2 to 5,7 or 5,9 or 5,5 (all possible), it's not adjacent anymore. If he has an ally at 5,7 then he's flanking the goblin. Perfectly precise, no need to change the rules, but no 'square counting' or distracting concrete representation, just math.
And, it's not that alien, either. When most of us run 3e combats we just not the altitude of the 3d elements, rather than elevating them to scale above the play surface or anything. That's the same thing - a number representing position - just only along one dimension instead of two. The cartesian system could be extended to handle 3ED, as well.
When I create 3D terrain, I use the same 5' per 1" measurement. I've also attempted to get a fairly accurate height I'd need to sculpt miniatures to be the correct height in relation to the environment. That, for me, is easy awesome math. Much easier that trying to visualise an X/Y/Z grid in my head, and trust everyone else to do the same, at least.
Hey, if he can get what he wants I am super hapy for Dave. I'm just not able to even start to wrap my mind around tracking everything that is visually happening in my mind. Probably because I've never had to before. I picture a scene, then draw it or paint it.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- )
Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right. fun quotesShow
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?
