Quote from: gleichman;545464Then I must withdraw my compliment. Sorry for wasting the bandwidth.

Gleichman, do you have any idea how you sound? I feel like I am being more than civil with you (notice morrow and I basically have the same disagreement, and he has just as much conviction a you, but he manages to do it without the attitude you seem to have). I assure you, the world is not as black and white as you seem to think.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;545467Gleichman, do you have any idea how you sound?

Yes I do. I saying what I really think.

Personally I'd put that ahead of insults and the ad hominem attacks common on this site, but I can understand how people today wish to avoid honest statements.

Quote from: gleichman;545468Yes I do. I saying what I really think.

Personally I'd put that ahead of insults and the ad hominem attacks common on this site, but I can understand how people today wish to avoid honest statements.

I am not a fan of the insults and ad homs. But how you are acting isn't much better frankly. And I think your certainty and sense of superiority is leading you to miss a lot of subtleties.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;545470I am not a fan of the insults and ad homs. But how you are acting isn't much better frankly..

Not a fan of blunt and honest I see. But seeing how I'm even less a fan of concealment and lying we again are at an impasse.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;545470And I think your certainty and sense of superiority is leading you to miss a lot of subtleties.

I think it's actually revealing a lot of subtleties to me. If we ever do sit down at a Chili's, I'll explain.

Quote from: gleichman;545473Not a fan of blunt and honest I see. But seeing how I'm even less a fan of concealment and lying we again are at an impasse.


.

I am very much a fan of blunt honesty. Just not your unique brand of it.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;545477I am very much a fan of blunt honesty. Just not your unique brand of it.

There are enough people that are, that I'm not unsettle in the least by your disapproval.

But so much for Chili's I guess.

Quote from: gleichman;545430What part of "I don't have any interest in D&D" did you not understand?

Then why do you keep posting on this thread instead of taking it somewhere else?

Quote from: Benoist;545483Then why do you keep posting on this thread instead of taking it somewhere else?

The subject (Mother My I) started in this thread. I'd take it elsewhere when people replying to me or posting on that and related subjects do.

Quote from: gleichman;545495The subject (Mother My I) started in this thread. I'd take it elsewhere when people replying to me or posting on that and related subjects do.

I guess it's good to know you actually won't be ignoring my posts.

There's a Mother -May-I thread now. Use it.

This thread is for D&D Next.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;545457Granularity is certainly less. But then the squares are just models and are not really supposed to be there, so with the grid you are assessing lots of metagame, non existent Elements, without the grid you are still interacting with the evironment the GM describes, but without things like spaces on the board and blast radiuses to consider. I just find when you shift to the grid it very much plays more like a boardgame and that is going to be slowers.

And like I said, in my experience, as soon as the players start having sophisticated interactions with the environment, the players or GM ask to switch over to a drawn out map because it's faster.  How long does it take to sketch out, say, Benoist's example room with cultists and pit and drop the pawns on the map that represent the bad guys and the PCs vs. how long does it take to verbally clarify those details?  The only way I see it going faster is when the verbal descriptions are also simpler, thus the speed comes from a simpler and less detailed understanding of and interaction with the setting.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;545457Edit: yes much of the speed stems fom simplicity (though it isnt as simple asyou example). You get more granularity with a grid, but i think it is a trade off. At doesnt mean theater of the mind has no granularity. Like i said as GM, i track stuff on the sheet. But the players go by how decribe things. In a way i find thismore realistic because in a real fight your pov is first person not third person bird'seye (like a grid).

Unless you are playing one-on-one games where the GM crafts the situational descriptions to the perception of a single PC, I think the "PC POV" vs. "Bird's Eye View" issue is a bit of a red herring because you are eventually going to wind up hearing the GM describe things for other characters that your character doesn't see, basically producing a verbal version of a "Bird's Eye View".  And even where this is possible for a GM to pull off, I'm a bit wary of the GM making assumptions about where my character is looking or paying attention to.  It's one of the reasons why I actually prefer rules that don't have an explicit facing, which assume a character spends an entire round looking in a single direction.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;545457Then my suggestion is for you to keep using the grid and dont embrace my style pf play. I dont feel i lose that much detail, and actually find it feels more real than on the grid. My other hobby (before getting so sick) was martial artts with heavy sparring like boxing, muay thai, etc. This is totally subjective, but i find the grid never feels real enough for me because that is my point of reference and theater of the mind captures the feel of a fight for me. I know martial artists who completely disagree with me, so i a, not trying to say that gives me some kind of authority on the subect, just that it informs my preference.

Is the problem the grid or the rules applied to the grid?  Just having a grid under the map does not automatically require you to place every character in the middle of a square or hex or move them in full squares or hexes.  Would a sketch on a blank white board with no grid solve your problem?

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;545457I understand you are trying to get to the bottom of things here, but i dont have any interest in fixing a perceived problem. I am fine not using the grid, or using it, depending on what I want. I have done this long enough that i knoow what I like, i know what works for me, and i know what speeds up or slows down play for me.

Sure, but it doesn't mean it can't cause you problems down the line.  As I've said, one can replicate the detail of a drawing verbally with "20 Questions".  If I were to play in your game and started asking you detailed questions about what my character could or couldn't do and about the specifics of the environment before I described what my character was doing each round, what would your reaction be?  Would you be fine with that or would it be creating the problem, without a grid, that you've dropped grids to avoid?

Quote from: John Morrow;545497And like I said, in my experience, as soon as the players start having sophisticated interactions with the environment, the players or GM ask to switch over to a drawn out map because it's faster.  How long does it take to sketch out, say, Benoist's example room with cultists and pit and drop the pawns on the map that represent the bad guys and the PCs vs. how long does it take to verbally clarify those details?  The only way I see it going faster is when the verbal descriptions are also simpler, thus the speed comes from a simpler and less detailed understanding of and interaction with the setting.

Personally I find it much faster describe these things than draw them, but that could just be me. I will say it does depend greatly on the scene. If something is difficult to put into words but precision is important for understanding it, I have no problem sketching a diagram or switching to the grid for that purpose. There will definitely be times when the GM needs to draw on other tools at his disposal if words prove innadequate.

QuoteUnless you are playing one-on-one games where the GM crafts the situational descriptions to the perception of a single PC, I think the "PC POV" vs. "Bird's Eye View" issue is a bit of a red herring because you are eventually going to wind up hearing the GM describe things for other characters that your character doesn't see, basically producing a verbal version of a "Bird's Eye View".  And even where this is possible for a GM to pull off, I'm a bit wary of the GM making assumptions about where my character is looking or paying attention to.  It's one of the reasons why I actually prefer rules that don't have an explicit facing, which assume a character spends an entire round looking in a single direction.

For me this is a very real issue. When the GM describes the scene to me, I immediately visualize it from my character's perspective. It is isn't going to be perfect, because as you point out the GM has to assume certain things about where you are looking (but I find common sense generally works well here--it is also important for the GM to ask questions if he needs important information). When I shift to the grid I immediately find I am looking at things from the third person. Not saying this is everyone's experience. But it is how I experience the two approaches.

QuoteIs the problem the grid or the rules applied to the grid?  Just having a grid under the map does not automatically require you to place every character in the middle of a square or hex or move them in full squares or hexes.  Would a sketch on a blank white board with no grid solve your problem?

It would probably solve some of the time issues. The metagame elements of squares is a big part of the issue for me (one reason I responded positively to some of BV's suggestions). But at the same time, I still find I run into the third person, not expereincing things in the moment, issue I have. Don't get me wrong. I do use these things in games myself and play happily in games that use them. They just are not my preference. I am much happier running or playing in a game where grid and visual aids are kept to a minimum.

QuoteSure, but it doesn't mean it can't cause you problems down the line.  As I've said, one can replicate the detail of a drawing verbally with "20 Questions".  If I were to play in your game and started asking you detailed questions about what my character could or couldn't do and about the specifics of the environment before I described what my character was doing each round, what would your reaction be?  Would you be fine with that or would it be creating the problem, without a grid, that you've dropped grids to avoid?

Yes, but I am very adaptable to the group. Even though I would rather play theater of the mind in say my Ravenloft 2E game, if multiple people wanted the grid, I would make the shift.

Playstyle issues are playstyle issues and vary from table to table. If you were asking detailed questions I would be happy to answer, but would pay attention to how other players responded (I can go on and on answering player questions happily, but if the other players feel). Frankly if you are the odd man out in the group (say four people don't want the grid and don't want the detailed line of questioning) my expectation would be for you to adapt to the group's style----just like if I was in your group I wouldn't allow my preferences to interefer with the established style (for instance my inclination may be to match your detailed questioning about the environment with detailed questioning of locals once we get to town, but I am going to forgo this if its clear your group wants to just move onto the next thing). But just to be clear again, it isn't that I never use the grid or have dropped it completely. It is that my preference is for games where it is not used that much.

Quote from: gleichman;545480There are enough people that are, that I'm not unsettle in the least by your disapproval.

But so much for Chili's I guess.

I am perfectly capable of having a polite meal with someone who is arrogant. Still happy to go to chili's but going to match your brand of blunt honesty with my own when your attitude wears thin.

Quote from: One Horse Town;545454So what are your thoughts on the playtest document?

I haven't seen it yet, is there a way I can get a look at it without giving a DNA sample to Wizards?
Considering I'm a B/X guy is there any point in me looking at it.

Quote from: Aos;545508I haven't seen it yet, is there a way I can get a look at it without giving a DNA sample to Wizards?
Considering I'm a B/X guy is there any point in me looking at it.

I do have a rapidshare link but I won't be able to PM you it until tomorrow. But as I said previously it's closer to C&C without the SEIGE mecnanics than B/X.

Later I was able to download it from Wotc once they fixed their issues with the download link.

Okay, I don't know shit about C&C though.
whatever, can someone outline the advantage disadvantage thing that has ruffled so many feathers. I feel like I'm going to need more knowledge before I can effectively contribute to these threads.
And when I say contribute, I mean troll.