Quote from: gleichman;544554I

Sloppy, ruins simulation and slows the game down besides if any player should have the backbone to point out clear errors in the DM descriptions and rulings..

i have to say that this post suggests my experience with GM-player relationships is possbly different from yours. There appears to be an adversarial assumption at work here. In my games I welcome players questioning my judgment and am happy to make changes when It looks like I was wrong about something. This happens in any game (miniatures or no). It doesn't take any backbone for a player in my group to say "brendan I think you have that wrong".

Quote from: beejazz;544556There's a player side to this as well, Benoist describes players asking how far apart the orcs are, where mine would probably ask a more results-oriented question like "how many can we hit" or "do we risk cooking ourselves?"

I don't think too many people care whether the orcs are 5 or 10 feet apart if they can get that kind of information. YMMV and all that.

Excellent point.

Quote from: gleichman;544554I won't play in games where it's the norm, although I have observed them.

And yes, you are correct. Typically they lack even the most basic information (such as range) to correctly use the rules they'd declared as their game. They are in fact, free form.

Hence, it's all about asking the GM "Am I in range to do x" (i.e. mother, may I make an attack from here).

This right here is why I use zones. They're roughly 30 ft, players can move anywhere in-zone or in the next zone as a move action, thrown weapons can typically be thrown into the next zone, projectiles are effectively line of sight until there's cover and so on.

It may not be great simulation, but for what I use it for, it has rarely run into any significant snags. If players have a clear description and know the system, they don't have to ask a whole lot of me.

QuoteThose who value real simulation in the rpgs however are going to object to mechanics and methods like this.

I guess I haven't met many people interested in real simulation.

Quote from: gleichman;544491It's my understanding from this thread that it's not clearly spelled out in the rules and the application of advantage and disadvantage is purely at GM's whim by design (rulings, no rules).

If that's not the case, and the various cases for advantage and disadvantage are clearly detailed- then I have no explanation for the 'mother may I comment'.

Even if that's the case, there are a couple things i would say about it. First, it's a playtest document, not a finished product. Perhaps once the feedback is given, the application of this specific system will become better defined. Second, I have never once had to doubt or distrust my DM's "whim". I play with friends and folks I have a measure of trust in. My DMs have always sought player feedback and involvment in these kinds of things. I don't understand one anyone would play in the game of a DM that didn't, and that one didn't trust with these sorts of choices. Have you really found it to be a problem? I haven't in over 30 years, and it's not like I've sat in one gaming group the whole time either, I have moved around quite frequently.

Quote from: beejazz;544556I don't think too many people care whether the orcs are 5 or 10 feet apart if they can get that kind of information. YMMV and all that.

They should if their blast diameter is 6 feet (very common in HERO btw).

Quote from: Benoist;544558It's called "talking to each other," you moron.

No, it's called being told 'yes or no', all the whim of the GM instead of as the reslt of objective information.

Talking to each other is a different activity, one very common at my game tables.

Quote from: gleichman;544571They should if their blast diameter is 6 feet (very common in HERO btw).

Another excellent reason not to measure blast diameters in feet.

But here, they aren't actually interested in the footage. They're interested in the effect, and the footage is how they find that out. And given that the GM arbitrarily sets that footage, isn't that just another game of mother-may-I?

Quote from: Drohem;544559'Real simulation' is the realm for people who have no social skills whatsoever.

It's statements like this that result in the various divides in gaming. It's pure ad hominem without justification, made to make yourself feel better by looking down on a different play style.

Quote from: gleichman;544573No, it's called being told 'yes or no', all the whim of the GM instead of as the reslt of objective information.

It's a nonsensical statement because it basically assumes the DM can't provide you with objective information, and/or acts on a whim. That shows some serious lack of confidence in your DM, at the very least, and more than likely makes me question the quality of your empathy and social skills in general.

Quote from: One Horse Town;544560PCs don't tend to have caliper eyes or tape-measure/protractor beams coming from their heads - anymore than you or i do.

Hence why the game is a simulation instead of reality.

I find that consistency and accurate results more than pay for the lost of 'fog of war', and indeed goes a long ways to allowing non-combatant people like accountants play Navy SEALS for the like (by making up for their lack of knowledge and tactical skills by the use of a God's Eye view).

Quote from: beejazz;544568I guess I haven't met many people interested in real simulation.

That's very likely, groups tend to select people like themselves.

Quote from: Benoist;544577It's a nonsensical statement because it basically assumes the DM can't provide you with objective information, and/or acts on a whim. That shows some serious lack of confidence in your DM, at the very least, and more than likely makes me question the quality of your empathy and social skills in general.

You've given me an example, and yes- I say the actions taken was based upon DM whim.

And nice dip to ad hominem for you too I see.

Quote from: beejazz;544574Another excellent reason not to measure blast diameters in feet.

But here, they aren't actually interested in the footage. They're interested in the effect, and the footage is how they find that out. And given that the GM arbitrarily sets that footage, isn't that just another game of mother-may-I?

You said it,  "And given that the GM arbitrarily sets that footage" yourself.

Quote from: gleichman;544581I find that consistency and accurate results more than pay for the lost of 'fog of war', and indeed goes a long ways to allowing non-combatant people like accountants play Navy SEALS for the like (by making up for their lack of knowledge and tactical skills by the use of a God's Eye view).

There is that, sure.

The other side of the coin is people who want character immersion. For those folk, i'm sure eyeballing positions, distances etc based on the character-eye view is appreciated.

Quote from: gleichman;544586You've given me an example, and yes- I say the actions taken was based upon DM whim.

Well good luck with that. You might need some psychological help, though.

To be clear, I don't mind whether you like it better with miniatures or whatnot. It's when you start making completely stupid statements like this that you're going out of the reservation and really sound like a total idiot who can't take his head out of his ass. People have been playing RPGs without miniatures for more than thirty years. It goes great for a great many of them, some of them here on this thread telling you they feel like they had accurate information and a good communication with their DMs, explaining to you how that works for them and all. And you're basically telling them they can't possibly have had any idea what they were doing that way. This is really dumb.