tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post3897611027030147541..comments2024-03-26T15:35:56.004-04:00Comments on Delta's D&D Hotspot: Radius or Diameter?Deltahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-84274629094155834122023-08-19T19:15:47.830-04:002023-08-19T19:15:47.830-04:00I personally hand a player the wet-erase pen and h...I personally hand a player the wet-erase pen and have them mark the target of the spell. They know the radius, so you would think they could pick a spot that would result in no friendly fire. Alas, when the whole shape is drawn up, the result is sometimes suboptimal. This is partly because I don't want someone to draw a whole circle and then decide they actually want it to be somewhere else; too much time. <br /><br />I believe that a caster would need to target a spot from whence the spell blossoms, rather than seeing some hologram of the area that moves around as the caster moves their target point. That would be an amazing UI benefit for a high-level MU! You see this frequently in modern video games like BG3. <br /><br />My method also takes into account that Fireballs and a few other spells fill volume, and it's up to the DM to decide on how that goes depending on ceiling height, how many halls leading away there are to accept the pressure, etc. And so indoors it's usual for Fireballs to either be shot too far downrange (down a long hall for example, or into a high-ceilinged room where more of the volume is taken up than the player expected), and miss some of the enemy, or else targeted too close and fry some of the PCs. This uncertainty is a desirable part of the game. <br /><br />If I called for the player to drop a template down, it's effectively asking them to select the nearest edge of the diameter, and giving them several chances to adjust to get things perfect. Which is not what I want to see. <br /><br />From my perspective, when dealing with circles, I need to know the center point and the radius. For example, if I need to draw out the area of a potential well on the ground, I might want a well of a certain diameter to fit the lid or whatever, but to actually dig the well I need to mark some center point and draw the circle around that using the radius. <br /><br />I can definitely see using the diameter to describe the well, though. It's a 3' well, not a 1.5' radius well. Same with a Fireball being a 40' sphere. I guess it's up to the game to convey to the DM that this is how the description works, because otherwise overeager players will be trying to plot out Fireballs with 40' radii. The issue is maintaining an understanding that radius and diameter are inextricably linked, with diameter being the nominal and ideological size but radius being the tool used to accomplish that.<br /><br />Interestingly, practical geometry cares about the center point of a square, too. If I want to draw a square on the ground that has 90-degree corners, I'll need to test the draft square by measuring diagonally corner to corner; if these two measurements are equal I know I have achieved an accurate square. This creates a center point of the square at the intersection of the diagonals. So, while drawing a circle requires first creating a center point, and we put great emphasis on it, creating a square requires finally creating a center point and it's given little importance. 1d30https://www.blogger.com/profile/06462767342794822654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-72697769323951153482023-03-02T12:15:59.657-05:002023-03-02T12:15:59.657-05:00I can totally see that.I can totally see that.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-58165187888410943782023-03-02T12:15:09.812-05:002023-03-02T12:15:09.812-05:00Damn, that's a nifty insight. My own instinct ...Damn, that's a nifty insight. My own instinct echoes that, that from the fireball caster's perspective diameter is better, while from the target's radius is better (but not ever agrees with that).Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-50877009889493068212023-02-28T22:59:51.458-05:002023-02-28T22:59:51.458-05:00Thinking now on using diameter, it does seem to ha...Thinking now on using diameter, it does seem to have some nice qualities. For big area spells like fireball, it makes a kind of intuitive sense that you create it from a face, like with cube spells. It would also make ranges feel more consistent.<br /><br />However, the main case for radii seems to be things which would be centered on the character. Torches and light sources being the obvious one here, but I think this would also be relevant for spells like Silence or Darkness which you could attach to an object. Lots to think on further hereDummySpicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17338900014146664445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-57559219577856638342023-02-28T08:27:57.852-05:002023-02-28T08:27:57.852-05:00Similar discussions come up in engineering and con...Similar discussions come up in engineering and constriction. The answer that I've worked with now for 28y is that whether to define a circle by radius or diameter comes down to whether you will be standing inside or outside the circle in question. Therefore we speak about crane operating radius but we talk about pipe or pile diameter.<br /><br />In D&D terms I'd say that Fireball is defined by diameter but Protection from evil is defined by radius.Jacob72https://www.blogger.com/profile/17268402292420473229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-44495880440294012152023-02-27T22:07:06.696-05:002023-02-27T22:07:06.696-05:00The coolest kids are out here using circumferenceThe coolest kids are out here using circumferenceCanyonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11548038228505187280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-78107827301687957032023-02-27T18:31:27.021-05:002023-02-27T18:31:27.021-05:00I lean towards radius on this, since you 'cent...I lean towards radius on this, since you 'center' a spell on an area, and then are thinking of how 'far' it is going to reach. When playing a caster, I think in radius, not diameter.Dr. Mike Desinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03826501692186095437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-18585062035255958492023-02-27T17:22:20.514-05:002023-02-27T17:22:20.514-05:00I think I agree, that's a strong case. Most of...I think I agree, that's a strong case. Most of the arguments I'm seeing for radius seem to slide in exactly that direction. Also there's some good comments that theater-of-the-mind works better with declared center & radius, vs. a miniatures game where you plop down a physical template (which is exactly what Gary in Swords & Spells and me in Book of War et. al. are are dealing with).Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-44405839849754804622023-02-27T17:19:37.221-05:002023-02-27T17:19:37.221-05:00Ack, it hurts us. :-) I think my rules' focus ...Ack, it hurts us. :-) I think my rules' focus on extreme minimalism strikes that out as an option.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-34047921730553038912023-02-27T12:10:11.585-05:002023-02-27T12:10:11.585-05:00I think the evolution maybe comes from the perspec...I think the evolution maybe comes from the perspective of the player. With miniatures it is more of an open terrain, top-down perspective, while in the RPG it is more from the point of view of a character in a dungeon with lots of potential items or beings in the way.<br /><br />When I'm looking at an area in front of me, I don't consider a diameter around a center, I look from side to side from the center point; when I look down at a miniature I have the eagle's eye perspective of everything around the target.<br /><br />Though that might be overthinking Gary's thought process.James Mishlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03510782553325944558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-55748969595376097732023-02-27T11:52:55.872-05:002023-02-27T11:52:55.872-05:00My knee-jerk response was radius, but honestly you...My knee-jerk response was radius, but honestly you make a compelling case for diameter. Can you list both? I.e. 15' radius (30' D.)Nathan Irvinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10748510598803702118noreply@blogger.com