Stamets@lemmy.world to memes@lemmy.world · 7 个月前I mean... I don't see the problem?lemmy.worldimagemessage-square65linkfedilinkarrow-up1668arrow-down113file-textcross-posted to: science_memes@mander.xyz
arrow-up1655arrow-down1imageI mean... I don't see the problem?lemmy.worldStamets@lemmy.world to memes@lemmy.world · 7 个月前message-square65linkfedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: science_memes@mander.xyz
minus-squareGoodLuckToFriends@lemmy.todaylinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·7 个月前Pffft, Dnd had the ‘first diagonal 5, second diagonal 10’ rule. It worked well enough, aye?
minus-squarebrown567@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up6·7 个月前It doesn’t anymore =( 5e uses diagonal = 5’
minus-squareedgemaster72@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·7 个月前Alternating diagonals is in the (2014) DMG as an optional rule at least
minus-squarebrown567@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up5·7 个月前Oh good! Octagons are a much better approximation of a circle than squares
minus-squareZagorath@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·7 个月前4e just used “squares” instead of 5 feet, but it, like 5e, used chebyshev distances. Pathfinder 2e uses alternating diagonals though.
minus-squareVespair@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up4·7 个月前Well anything after 3.5e is a watered-down, bastardized version of the game anyway.
Ah, D&D rules
Pffft, Dnd had the ‘first diagonal 5, second diagonal 10’ rule. It worked well enough, aye?
It doesn’t anymore =(
5e uses diagonal = 5’
Alternating diagonals is in the (2014) DMG as an optional rule at least
Oh good! Octagons are a much better approximation of a circle than squares
4e just used “squares” instead of 5 feet, but it, like 5e, used chebyshev distances.
Pathfinder 2e uses alternating diagonals though.
Well anything after 3.5e is a watered-down, bastardized version of the game anyway.
D&D still doesn’t have hexagons?