A few thoughts…
All images courtesy of the D&D 3.5 Phb, copyright Wizards of the Coast. That’s the, hmm, edition, that, hmmm, didn’t have to play like on a board and stuff, and feel so “board gamey”.
Posted in: Gaming
Subscribe:
RSS feed
www. Newbie DM .com 
taichara
May 5, 2009
Sure tis! 3.5 and its even greater move towards exactly that (somehow we’d managed to handwave away chunks of the 3.0 iteration) is what turned my group off.
(to be honest the change in how movement was handled in squares in general, in 3.5, irked us. greatly.)
I don’t play 4e myself (have no trouble with others playing it, though), but that particular argument you’re refuting has always amused me. In an “oh no you didn’t” kind of way, mind …
greywulf
May 5, 2009
The difference was that it was very easy in 3e to ignore all that stuff and run 100% in-your-head games. Replace the crummy Attack of Opportunity rules with common sense, and you’re there. In 4e, all of the Powers enforce the expectation that you’re playing on a battlemat, all the time. It’s much harder (though not impossible) to ignore that.
Lurkinggherkin
May 5, 2009
I’ve responded here.
mike
May 5, 2009
i’ve played every edition out there, and it always caused arguments between players & dm’s when not using some sort of method of determine who is where in combat. As editions have come by and players & dm’s been given more combat freedom the rules had to have been clarified for it. Its what you do in between combat that matters
Matt
August 25, 2009
I think there’s nothing wrong with maps/tiles and minis – it makes it a lot easier to keep track of where PCs are!
undurdern
February 16, 2011
знакомый доктор
Occattepaudge
October 2, 2011
Прогнозы на футбол