D&D 5E Moving diagonally between enemies on a grid

[S'mon]

Unless I declared I was running 5e under 4e rules (an option in the DMG) I wouldn't treat the grid as 'real' like that. If 2 PCs want to stand adjacent, they're adjacent, and can block enemies.

Edit: I vote ruler/tape measure!

 

[Jester David]

I'd probably consider it blocking. But if a player really wanted to try I'd say it's difficult terrain and call for a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to wriggle through.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

A hex grid can be super convenient, even if you don't require anyone to stay fully inside a single hex. With the grid in place on the table, you can move from any point to any other point and measure the distance by the number of lines you cross. It's not perfect, but it should be close enough for all practical purposes, given that you only have five-foot resolution anyway.

 

[MNblockhead]

I use grids less and less and tend to throw down gridless terrain mats, tiles, and clothes.

When I DO use grids, they are only for helping to help draw the environment to a rough scale with a wet erase marker.

To actually measure movement, however, I use a measuring stick. It is six inches long and is marked with alternating black and blank sections every one inch. I got the idea from DM Scotty and he shows how to make these here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTT1ZU5pDBg

These are easy. Go get the stuff at a craft store and use up as much of the wood sticks and paint as you can and you'll have enough for a life time, with plenty to spare for giving out to friends.

Throw a bunch of these down at the table during play and never have to worry about grids again. You can move anywhere you have room to move to. Whether you have room to move can be measured using the sticks.

This is such an easy solution. You never have to worry about whether you have a grid or not. Heck you don't even need a mat. You can just use table space and set up the minis and use legos, cups, anything as terrain features. Of course, I like to use nice felt terrain cloths and various crafted and purchased terrain features, but not having to gridout battlemaps for a game is very freeing.

Now, if you are doing all this in a VTT, don't most of those have a tools to measure distance and area with click and drag?

 

[Mercule]

Final note: when using a grid, you should also draw from the middle of the square when drawing diagonals to keep the same effect. Otherwise you have a lot of unusable half-squares.

I assume you mean draw from the center of one edge of the square, not the center of the square, itself, leaving 3/4 and 1/4 squares. If so, I really like your idea and can't believe I've never run across it before. Probably the only concern with it is that most maps are mostly square to the world, with an occasional diagonal and the shift occurs at an even square interval. That's easy enough to adjust, it just takes some thought.

Having said that, offset squares is probably the best of both worlds, hex and squares. They are virtually identical to hexes, but they are squares. Hence, they often fit quite well in square or rectangular shaped rooms (although that isn't actually a real problem with hexes, but some players could get confused).

I don't see how this would solve the problem with lateral movement. It'll still be offset. I haven't actually used offset squares, but it seems like they might actually bring more of the cons for each option than the pros. You don't even get the 2/3:1/3 hex option for square lines, so you must use half spaces.

One other advantage of hexes, other than the partially diagonal movement one, is that of spells with a radius. Pick an intersection between 3 hexes and count out in all directions the radius of the effect. Squares are kind of wonky when it comes to Fireballs. This advantage also works in offset squares.

OK. This is, in fact, true. The 3.5 templates didn't really bother me, but I'll grant that they weren't always intuitive. Firecubes suck, though.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

Typically I allow players to go diag through enemies so that works for enemies, too. The only diag I don't allow is hard corners.

 

[Li Shenron]

I went gridless a long time ago...

If you insist on using a grid and want a compromise between squares and hexagons, you can try pentagons.

 

[Dausuul]

Do other people have an issue with this? This was initiated by a player. Two PCs were diagonally adjacent, and an enemy moved up and tried to pass between them. The player declared the creature couldn't pass them diagonally. I didn't mind the the idea (and didn't want to look it up), so I let is stick. And reinforced it the next time a PC tried the same move. Now that is counts against them the other players don't like it.

How do others feel about this?

I would allow diagonal movement between enemies, but I'd be fine with a ruling that went the other way.

Regardless, what's good for the monsters is good for the PCs, as I make a point of reminding my players whenever they propose an... expansive reading of the rules.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I use grid mainly because all the maps have a grid and if I go for gridless my players constantly keep asking me where exactly they can move to.

I guess according to the rules, cutting corners isn't allowed. If you can't move through an enemy's space that could be considered to work like a wall, in that case, diagonal movement past wouldn't work. But that would also mean that moving one time around a normal sized enemy requires 40ft of movement instead of 20ft.

But what I personally think is they don't count as wall, so diagonal movement past them works.

 

[jasper]

Hex grids just look so hideous if you are in a square room. all those 1/2 hex just magically unusable.

?????? I have always used them as a full square. Granted the minis get bunched up. But I just flow with it.