Rounds/hours question
Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 4:37 am
Does anyone know how many rounds are in an hour? (in NWN of course)
yes, its still very confusing. IN fact, I find it a lot easier just to play the game rather than looking up to figure out how long some spell is going to last.Brock Fanning wrote:Reminds me of how annoyingly confusing the spell durations in NWN are. You've got: round/level, minute/level, hour/level... I think there are some that are 10 minutes per level too right? *brain explodes*
Am I right in thinking that a minute is the same as a turn? Wait a second, hmm.. That would mean 10 minutes is more than an hour... *brain explodes again*
Back in 1st and 2nd ed. Pnp, a round was comprised of 10 segments and was a minute long. There were 10 rounds in a turn and 6 turns in an hour. Did this change for 3rd ed?Titanium Dragon wrote:In PnP, there are 10 rounds in a minute and 10 minutes in a turn. There are 6 turns in an hour. Just because this is the next logical question and someone will ask it, so I'm answering preemptively.
Yes, it changed. I always thought it was silly anyway, taking an entire minute and all i did was swing once? Right.Someone Else's Problem wrote:Back in 1st and 2nd ed. Pnp, a round was comprised of 10 segments and was a minute long. There were 10 rounds in a turn and 6 turns in an hour. Did this change for 3rd ed?Titanium Dragon wrote:In PnP, there are 10 rounds in a minute and 10 minutes in a turn. There are 6 turns in an hour. Just because this is the next logical question and someone will ask it, so I'm answering preemptively.
They were probably just keeping in line with 3e, some spells in 3e are minutes/lvl.Dirk Cutlass wrote:To add to the confusion I noticed that some of the newer spell descriptions (i.e. from HotU) appear to be given in minutes / level or similar rather than rounds! Ye gads whatever next?
Not that it really matters, but it wasn't just one swing, it was a series of "moves" that resulted in one chance to have an effective attack (or more at higher levels).Strangg wrote: Yes, it changed. I always thought it was silly anyway, taking an entire minute and all i did was swing once? Right.
~S
Like i said, still silly. As my "effective attack" still missed more often than not(speaking of lower levels here), so it wasn't that effective now was it? I always thought that cheeze explination of why you only got in 1 swing in rounds that were so long was crap. Thats why i like the 6 second round as apposed to the 60 second round.j5hale3 wrote:Not that it really matters, but it wasn't just one swing, it was a series of "moves" that resulted in one chance to have an effective attack (or more at higher levels).Strangg wrote: Yes, it changed. I always thought it was silly anyway, taking an entire minute and all i did was swing once? Right.
~S
Best regards,