the Narrative Positioning System

[Kaelik]

How about this: If you can convince all of your allies to stay put while you cast the spell, and you can make sure that none of your enemies move either (and you know where everyone is), you can be absolutely certain how many and which people your exploding ball of flame will hit.

How about this, I aim the spell after casting, not before. Do people dodge arrows by moving around while the archer is pulling the arrows from his quiver?

[erik]

How about this, I aim the spell after casting, not before. Do people dodge arrows by moving around while the archer is pulling the arrows from his quiver?

I imagine so. A moving target is a bit harder to hit than a still target. Unless you have mad arrow catching skills then you are better off on the move than preparing to dodge just as the arrow is launched.

Now, what would be a more awesome countermeasure than dodging is an archer with a readied action to snipe the fireball pellet with an arrow before it gets past the caster being beyond the blast radius. But I suppose that's neither here nor there.

Back to the question at hand, in a system with fuzzy positioning of players, I think it is pretty reasonable to assume fuzzy areas for effects as well. A perfectly delineated area of effect for a spell really doesn't jive with a system where players are "near" or "sorta near" instead of exact spacings apart. So it is somewhat unreasonable to assume that in a narrative positioning system, that a fireball is going to be so picture perfect and predictable.

[CatharzGodfoot]

How about this: If you can convince all of your allies to stay put while you cast the spell, and you can make sure that none of your enemies move either (and you know where everyone is), you can be absolutely certain how many and which people your exploding ball of flame will hit.

How about this, I aim the spell after casting, not before. Do people dodge arrows by moving around while the archer is pulling the arrows from his quiver?

Baby you know, you the one for me
And all that I want to be is...

You and me... and her, simultaneous
You and me... and you and you,
Simultaneous action baby, two or three...
Simultaneous ooh, come on

[MartinHarper]

How about this, I aim the spell after casting, not before.

If magic was such that this wasn't possible, would you accept the uncertainty?

[Kaelik]

If magic was such that this wasn't possible, would you accept the uncertainty?

If magic were such, I wouldn't need to accept the uncertainty, since no one in the universe would use magic.

[Quantumboost]

If magic was such that this wasn't possible, would you accept the uncertainty?

If magic were such, I wouldn't need to accept the uncertainty, since no one in the universe would use magic.

That's patently ridiculous, since the situation is that you *might* hit your allies with a fireball and don't know for certain, and there are actually people who already do that (for example, when a rogue/someone else with evasion is inside the blast radius).

[erik]

If magic was such that this wasn't possible, would you accept the uncertainty?

If magic were such, I wouldn't need to accept the uncertainty, since no one in the universe would use magic.

Crazy talk +1.

The ability to create explosive (not fragmentation) grenades with your mind? That shit isn't getting left behind just because it isn't 100% accurate. And it's not like all spells are hampered by a narrative positioning system, just the ones that affect an area, since area effects are by their very nature in such a system, a bit fuzzy.

Having to precisely know where everyone is for an effect really takes the teeth out of a system that is trying to avoid that very precision. It's a price you pay for that kind of system. A fireball would be the perfect tool for the job to launch *before* everyone else swarms in to engage a group of enemies. It's not the perfect tool once people are in hand to hand.

[Kaelik]

Nobody asked if fireball would be used if it were somewhat imprecise.

It was asked if you have to aim before casting the spell. Play D&D with every spell going off the round after it is cast. Notice that the accuracy is less than a hundred percent, and also, generally about 50%.

By which I mean you hit 50% of your enemies, and 50% of your allies, and your fireball is a total fucking waste of time.

God forbid you let people actually know where the fireball is being targeted in the aiming stage before the casting, you'll just miss everyone.

[erik]

I'm pretty sure everyone was still positing that the fireball is going off the same round you cast it.

It is just that people are moving at the same time you are casting and while the attack resolves during your turn, there is the chance of catching allies during the event because things are so hectic. If you encounter a pack of enemies who are not near your allies, then even in a narrative positioning mode there is no risk of hitting your allies with a fireball launched at your opponents.

[Kaelik]

I'm pretty sure everyone was still positing that the fireball is going off the same round you cast it.

It is just that people are moving at the same time you are casting and while the attack resolves during your turn, there is the chance of catching allies during the event because things are so hectic. If you encounter a pack of enemies who are not near your allies, then even in a narrative positioning mode there is no risk of hitting your allies with a fireball launched at your opponents.

The same round or a different round is just a measure or degree, and it's an arbitrary one anyway. If during the casting of the spell someone can move 20 feet, you can never ever hit them with a fireball. If you are attempting to hit multiple enemies, that's even dumber.

Take your example of people charging. Either the Wizard is a super fucking genius who correctly calculates the future location of his enemies, and his enemies don't change direction at all when they notice him casting a spell (or worse, he's a Thrawn level arbitrary plot super genius who reads the future and knows which direction they are going to change direction to), or he misses the entire fucking group because they all move at 30ft per 3 seconds, and he has to aim 3 seconds before the spell goes off.

You can make a system in which aiming is irregular. It's fucking stupid and it means you can never play a competent Wizard ever, but it can at least make a kind of sense. You cannot play a game with aiming a spell long in advance of it's effects going off that even remotely involves people actually using the fireball spell in small party combat.

[erik]

Why can you not have it be such that an area effect targeting a group of enemies not in hand to hand with allies, is perfect, and when targeting a group that is in hand to hand with allies, there is a chance of friendly fire?

Doesn't mean that the wizard is not competent, it's just not the perfect tool for the job. Bust out some chain lighting or acid arrows or scorching ray or whatever. Something that targets as individuals instead of an area.

[Kaelik]

Doublepost.

[Kaelik]

Why can you not have it be such that an area effect targeting a group of enemies not in hand to hand with allies, is perfect, and when targeting a group that is in hand to hand with allies, there is a chance of friendly fire?

Doesn't mean that the wizard is not competent, it's just not the perfect tool for the job. Bust out some chain lighting or acid arrows or scorching ray or whatever. Something that targets as individuals instead of an area.

You must be working with a very different chain lightning then I am, but that aside, I specifically said that you can have an irregular fireball. But yes, it does mean your Wizard is incompetent if he can't arrange areas to not include his party members. Also, why if he can't arrange it to hit enemies when they close can he arrange to hit them from far away.

Shouldn't ever fucking one of them have a 50% chance of not being within range of his random area Firerandompolygon?

[erik]

You must be working with a very different chain lightning then I am

This one comes to mind.

Targets: One primary target, plus one secondary target/level (each of which must be within 30 ft. of the primary target)

But yes, it does mean your Wizard is incompetent if he can't arrange areas to not include his party members. Also, why if he can't arrange it to hit enemies when they close can he arrange to hit them from far away.

The problem isn't including guys in an area. That's easy. The problem is assuredly excluding guys adjacent to the included ones.

Area effects in a system with fuzzy positioning must by their very nature also be fuzzy. It's intrinsic. To the millimeter precision area effects simply aren't doable in such a system... or if they are, then they are actually going to be detailed as being effects like the chain lightning I quoted, where in practice they effectively are effects that target specifically chosen individuals.

There's spells that hit multiple targets without being area effects, there's area effects that only target enemies. Given these options, there's no pressing demand for insisting that non-selective area effects be selective in practice.

The competence of a caster need never come into question in this debate, unless it is regarding which spell is actually used for a given situation. I can't blame a mortar when a sniper rifle was the tool for the job.

Anywho, I don't see any benefit in continuing to argue this point, reckoning I've made my case. I will continue if you can make a good case for that:

1) In a system with fuzzy positioning, it is possible and worthwhile to treat a unilateral area effect as a precisely targeted selective spell.

or

2) By necessity, there should be no spells or effects available that unilaterally effect a given area.

So far you've been selling #1, and I don't think anyone is buying. #2 is debatable, but that's more of a style thing as I see it and I can't see a solid case for denying general area effects by necessity.

[Kaelik]

You must be working with a very different chain lightning then I am

This one comes to mind.

Targets: One primary target, plus one secondary target/level (each of which must be within 30 ft. of the primary target)

I just assumed we were talking about hypothetical spells, since the specific D&D ones include a fireball that's a uniform area.

1) In a system with fuzzy positioning, it is possible and worthwhile to treat a unilateral area effect as a precisely targeted selective spell.

So far you've been selling #1, and I don't think anyone is buying.

First, I'd advice you to speak for yourself and not everyone else. Second, what the flying goat fuck, your position is that it is both impossible and not worthwhile at all for the DM to answer 8 instead of maybe 8. Fuck me with a Candle stick you are too fucking retarded to speak to.

[CatharzGodfoot]

I just assumed we were talking about hypothetical spells, since the specific D&D ones include a fireball that's a uniform area.

Oh, it can be a uniform spherical area (although I think that's not especially good or interesting for an area fire attack; the damage is variable so why not the area?). The problem is that you can't be sure if an enemy or ally will move in or out of the effect as it manifests.

[Kaelik]

I just assumed we were talking about hypothetical spells, since the specific D&D ones include a fireball that's a uniform area.

Oh, it can be a uniform spherical area (although I think that's not especially good or interesting for an area fire attack; the damage is variable so why not the area?). The problem is that you can't be sure if an enemy or ally will move in or out of the effect as it manifests.

And once again, yes you totally can. In the course of 1/8th of second, people don't change their position more than 5ft, and you have an actual margin or error of hitting the bard adjacent to the goblin of 5ft. 10ft for the bard adjacent to the ogre.

And while we are making things variable because apparently that's more interesting "Guys! It's totally more interesting when your fireball could have a 50ft radius or a 5ft one and you have no idea when or why!" Why not make the distance it travels variable too. And the direction.

[Draco_Argentum]

And once again, yes you totally can. In the course of 1/8th of second, people don't change their position more than 5ft, and you have an actual margin or error of hitting the bard adjacent to the goblin of 5ft. 10ft for the bard adjacent to the ogre.

This is stupid. People don't lob explosives into melee without hitting their teammates in any fiction I'm aware of. D&D is the outlier here and wanting to change that is the sensible option. Your defense of precision AoE is strange and unsupported by the source.

[Orca]

Hi. Yes, I'm new here - I just wanted to mention that I've played in a couple of 3.0 games where we used something like this.

The way it worked is that when one of the wizards wanted to place an area spell in some fancy way the DM would give them a few options. If it was fireballing targets around a surrounded guy, the wizard would be able to get half of the targets safely, maybe 3/4 with a roll they'd make 50% of the time or more, maybe all of them with a really difficult roll (or a ~50% chance roll combined with the surrounded guy making a roll of his own to assist).

We used spellcraft to make these rolls (with some of the normal functions of spellcraft sent to Know. (arcana)) but you could use something else easily enough.

[Kaelik]

And once again, yes you totally can. In the course of 1/8th of second, people don't change their position more than 5ft, and you have an actual margin or error of hitting the bard adjacent to the goblin of 5ft. 10ft for the bard adjacent to the ogre.

This is stupid. People don't lob explosives into melee without hitting their teammates in any fiction I'm aware of. D&D is the outlier here and wanting to change that is the sensible option. Your defense of precision AoE is strange and unsupported by the source.

D&D is supposed to be a fucking outlier. I don't see anyone turning into a fucking Dragon one minute and fireballing the next and then stopping time in any fiction either. Your stupid ass novels should not be a reflection of a roleplaying game, because roleplaying games require certain things that novels don't.

No one is lobbing an explosive, they are targeting a fireball. Just like they target a lightning bolt, or a firewall. But no one in the history of ever has complained about precision targeting of those area effects.

You are flat out saying that no where in the entire fucking universe should exist a game that allows precision targetting. That is fucking crazy.

We are talking about a hypothetical narrative position game that is a roleplaying game that has parties that are 3-6 members and includes someone who fights in melee and someone who throws fireballs.

When the Wizard wants to cast a spell, there is a very important and very basic reason why the player should know who is affected and who isn't, and that's because nothing else makes a game worth playing.

If a Wizard casts a fireball and it is questionable who is affected by that area, you still have to resolve that question. You can't just avoid the question, it must be resolved.

All you fuckers are saying is that the Wizard shouldn't know how it is resolved until after he's made the decision, IE his decisions are totally meaningless.

If who the spell effects is decided arbitrarily by the DM after the casting, then you have a game of mother may I for combat mechanics, but you get punched in the face and lose a turn when mom says no. If the decision is made by some sort of rolling to hit mechanic, then you have just reset the question to giving the Wizard a target and forcing him to make a spellcraft check to cast his spell competently.

Having a "vague" placement so that you don't know who gets hit by a fireball doesn't reduce the amount of work you have to do, you still have to find out exactly who is or is not hit by the spell some fucking how.

If you want fireballing to not work in melee then give it a minimum range, or make it so that it automatically effects anyone adjacent to someone else hit, or something.

But goddam it, if the player has no idea who it is going to affect, and the DM is just going to make it hit certain people after he decides to cast it, then you might as well just take all the dice and throw them out the window, because now the DM just decides who takes damage and who doesn't.

[Orca]

Kaelik, I think you've got the reasonable order of events here mixed up. Try this:

1. Wizard's PC says "OK, I want to fireball all those orcs fighting Lord Wobert"
2. DM says "You can get half of them safely, or all of them with a DC 25+spell level, that's 28 - you'll get Lord Wobert as well if you fail"
3. Wizard's PC says "OK, I'll save the fireball and cast magic missile this round."

And yes, we used the same kind of system for chopping up melees with walls of fire.

[Previn]

1) I don't accidentally pick a spot that hits Bob the Bard and then change my mine, and neither does anyone else with half a brain.

Yes, you do. In large combats you check a couple times for range and areas before casting the spell to get the maximum number of targets you can get. You pick a spot that can get 5 orcs, but also ends up clipping Bob the Bard, oops, move the spot so Bob is outside and then cast.

In fact the only reason you might place it perfectly the first time is that you've been checking in your head on the grid in the first place. I think it would be a very eye opening experience to get a group of people out in a football field and have you say where to place the center of a 20' radius sphere, and see exactly how accurate you are at it.

2) Your character as a PC gets to see the area that would be enclosed by the spell before he casts it too. Your ally doesn't move just before you cast, and you don't misjudge the distance.

You character does not have the same view or knowledge of the combat area that you as the player do. Your ally might move just before you cast (interrupt action), and you might 'misjudge the distance' for a variety of reasons that get carried out through different mechanics and the narratively supported as 'misjudged the distance.' For example: missing a target with a bow is because you misjudged the distance.

3) Your character isn't wounded. Seriously, bullshit HP as morale + Wizards don't get hit means you aren't wounded.

Mechanically? No (unless you count conditions such as sicked, nauseaed, dazed, feared, etc). Narratively? Yes.

How about this, I aim the spell after casting, not before. Do people dodge arrows by moving around while the archer is pulling the arrows from his quiver?

If you're shooting at a target with a bow and they're any decent distance away, you aim for where you think they will be. The target just suddenly stopping moving or changing direction just as you fire (i.e. while the arrow is in flight) is enough to assure a miss.

You want precognition, 100% accuracy and instant effects. There is nothing wrong with this, but we think we can add something more to the game thorough the narrative approach, even when the actual rules don't change at all for determining hits.

But goddam it, if the player has no idea who it is going to affect, and the DM is just going to make it hit certain people after he decides to cast it, then you might as well just take all the dice and throw them out the window, because now the DM just decides who takes damage and who doesn't.

Really, all that I've suggested is that the character may not know at a glance if the targets are perfectly positioned, even if the player does. The fireball still hits exactly like it would have and it still gets optimally placed (even if it's the DM doing the placing).

In fact I'll easily go out and say: The narrative method for placement is more accurate than using a grid.

Back to my PHB pg.176 example. Imagine there is a PC 2 squares directly south the southern most Orc. In the square directly northwest of that PC is another PC. Now, PCs don't take up a whole 5' square. In this case, both PC's are in the northwestern most corner of their respective squares.

The PC in the southern square will be in the actual line of effect despite being out of the grid area of effect. The PC in the northwestern square would be out of the actual line of effect, despite being in the grid area of effect.

In a narrative positing system, they are still in the same spots, and the line effect still hits which ever targets it would have hit before (depending on if you're using the grid, or actual effect area). The only difference is that the PC doesn't have the perfect grid to assure him, and the DM puts hit of doubt into them.

[schpeelah]

I'm siding with Kaelik's

If you want fireballing to not work in melee then give it a minimum range, or make it so that it automatically effects anyone adjacent to someone else hit, or something.

Previn, you are proposing that we simply take the players' ability to aim their spells and give it to the DM, introducing an element of uncertainty "will the DM be a douchebag or not"?
I thought the system we are discussing here is "Narrative Positioning" and how you do area effects without a battlemap, and your solution is "hide the battlemap from the players"?

[erik]

I thought the system we are discussing here is "Narrative Positioning" and how you do area effects without a battlemap, and your solution is "hide the battlemap from the players"?

How about this:
If players are not engaged in melee with opponents then there is no risk of catching them in an area effect (unless it is something that fills the whole room/area anyway).
If they are engaged in melee with someone you wish to target with an area effect then it is about as hard to nail precisely as firing a projectile into a grapple except you have a chance of hitting both or neither. 50% miss chance on each.

It is a fringe case that leaves other options to the caster but in no way requires douchebaggery or lengthy finagling.

[CatharzGodfoot]

So here's another example. A small group of heroes is in the central chamber of the Temple of Yig, fighting a group of human cultist Warrior 5s led by two human cultist Adept 5s and a Valossian True Fiend 7. Taris the Tiefling Fire Mage 5/Conduit 2 wants to drop a fireball on the whole mess of them, but the warriors have managed to swarm the kuo toa samurai 7, and the human assassin is nowhere to be seen.

Taris has the option of dropping the fireball in such a way that it hits everyone but himself, because he's near the entry opposite the enemies. Unfortunately, it would almost certainly hit the samurai unless he manages to dive away at just the right time (reflex save). The assassin, meanwhile, is sneaking around the perimeter to attack the Valossan from behind. This means that she may or may not get toasted depending on where she is fireball goes off.

Taris decides that the assassin is probably going to take out the Valossan this round, so he decides to give the assassin a bit of space. The samurai, however, has a decent number of hit points and is using his balance skill for reflex saves (Lightning Reflexes).

For this attack, those near the edge of the blast (the assassin, the Valossan, and one of the Adepts) are considered to have evasion and improved evasion (i.e. half damage on a failure and none on a success). Everybody else except Taris is squarely hit (unless they save for half). The gambit is successful. About half of the mooks die outright, while the remainder sustain heavy damage.

The samurai manages to shield himself from the brunt of the blast with the body of a cultist while he carves a line through the survivors towards the Valossan, while the assassin pops out of the shadows and hits it with a death attack. The next round the mooks killed by the fireball animate as zombies and eat the stragglers.

That's an example of a very high degree of control over the blast with some uncertainty.