Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1006594I have been trying all my life, without success, to articulate my sphincter during flatulence to make intelligible words.  Would that count as fartistry?

Quote from: CRKrueger;1006682...visual expression is a far more efficient way to express visual and spatial data.

Also, no type of visual aid would require a grid to get that near-instantaneous information transfer.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1006912Abstract positioning, if done right, could contribute something I'm not sure I've seen in any existing game: A way to capture the elements of distance and timing that really matter in hand to hand fighting. Games generally deal with questions of where you are and when you act in ways that are totally unlike the way range and timing work in combat sports or fights. The reality is that range is dynamic, and order of actions is a lot less important than who is in control of distance and the flow of the action. D&D's traditional approach to this is actually pretty honest and clear:  the game doesn't really know how to handle it, so it all gets abstracted into a random initiative roll and a to-hit roll, and you shouldn't sweat the details. Or, equivalently, you can make them up in whatever way you enjoy most. Games that get very concrete about initiative and distance - The Fantasy Trip, Runequest, GURPS, etc., often result in something that is good as a game, in the sense that it is fun and the player can 'game' it to find advantageous strategies. But it isn't any closer to the way distance and timing work in fighting.

Quote from: ffilz;1006995This is something Burning Wheel attempts to capture.

Quote from: Larsdangly;1007005That's right, and it is one of the better ideas in BW. It is one of the reasons I seriously toyed with the idea of running BW, although its many other quirks kept me from overcoming the activation energy to starting a campaign. I used the system there as a starting point for an abstract positioning system I wrote for a home-brewed system, though it was really just one of those busy-work rules projects that didn't go anywhere.

Quote from: Cave Bear;1005622How abstract is too abstract where tactical positioning in combat is concerned?
How detailed is too detailed?

A lot of you guys seem to dislike the use of battlemats and miniatures. These components do take time to set up, and they add layers of complexity that can slow down play.

Some want the miniature, wargame experience. Some think this is to board-gamey.

What is your position on the matter?

Quote from: AsenRG;1007243And that's why I like abstract positioning, too, ever since I first read TRoS:).




Have you considered running TRoS, instead?

Quote from: Larsdangly;1007543I own TRoS and have vague memories of monkeying with it back when it first came out. I understand it has some good ideas for managing tactical combat, but I seem to recall feeling like the rest of the game wasn't quite 'on'.