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

[thexar]

Just curious, but if you don't use a grid, and they were .414 of an inch apart, how would you rule?

That's interesting. With 1" diameter base, I'd say no.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

On the battle map, two diagonally adjacent creatures are further apart than two creatures in adjacent squares by a distance of .414 of a square (2.07'), assuming they are exactly in their squares (I don't make figures conform to the squares in my game BTW).

They are only further apart if you treat them as point-particles acting at the center of the square. In the actual reality which the game is modeling, we just know that they're effectively somewhere in that area. If they were standing immediately adjacent to each other, literally back-to-back to prevent anyone from passing between them, then you would still model them as occupying adjacent squares, regardless of whether grid orientation places those sides flush or across a corner.

 

[DemonSlayer]

They are only further apart if you treat them as point-particles acting at the center of the square. In the actual reality which the game is modeling, we just know that they're effectively somewhere in that area. If they were standing immediately adjacent to each other, literally back-to-back to prevent anyone from passing between them, then you would still model them as occupying adjacent squares, regardless of whether grid orientation places those sides flush or across a corner.

Figures A, B, and C are located on the battle grid below with 1" squares. Their bases are 1" circular and fit inside the squares. (you have to work with me here a little and imagine the grid)

ABX
XCX
XXX

Erase the battle grid, like you suggested, and don't move the figures - imagine that this is where the figures moved to without the battle grid. Measure the distance from A's base to C's base at the closest possible points.

You will find that A and C are .414" apart. A to B would be 0" apart, and their base would be touching.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Figures A, B, and C are located on the battle grid below with 1" squares. Their bases are 1" circular and fit inside the squares. (you have to work with me here a little and imagine the grid)

ABX
XCX
XXX

Erase the battle grid, like you suggested, and don't move the figures - imagine that this is where the figures moved to without the battle grid. Measure the distance from A's base to C's base at the closest possible points.

You will find that A and C are .414" apart. A to B would be 0" apart, and their base would be touching.

The characters aren't actually circular bases that are 1" in diameter. The characters are actually people-shaped, with appendages and postures that can only vaguely be approximated as cylinders. If you have two individuals, standing back-to-back with no space between them, then this would be represented on the grid as:

XXX
ABX
XXX

But it could also be represented as:

AXX
XBX
XXX

The difference between these two situations is only the arbitrary orientation of the grid. But the grid isn't real, within the game world! The grid is only a tool to help us visualize what's actually going on. Since the in-game reality is identical between these two situations, we are obligated to treat them identically within the rules. If you wouldn't allow someone to pass between these characters in the first orientation, then you shouldn't allow someone to pass between them in the second orientation, or else you're being inconsistent.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I'm going to throw a +1 to Hex Grids on this... The Square Grid has major issues... But Hex Grid has been tried and true for generations of gamers.

No, hex grids give you 6 clear degrees of freedom, but if you want to move in any other direction you've got to do the hex grid wiggle to get anywhere and you don't move as far as you would if the grid were oriented differently. You move about a hex and a half. Since so many dungeons are square grid, you're either perfect north-south and wiggle east-west, or perfect east-west and wiggle north-south. Try placing two long 1" wide corridors at a right angle to each other, and the placing a 1" hex grid on top of that. You'll discover the problem pretty quickly. That's why hex grids are almost always used for large open area maps and overall campaign world maps.

Conical area effects are also randomly nightmarish to place.

 

[discosoc]

Remember that each space is a 5ft square and the person occupying it is most likely a 3foot wide or less person. (barring fighting gelatinous cubes)



Basically, the creatures aren't actually a solid unit, so they aren't blocking movement from diagonal.

Hex vs grid, grid gives more area for monsters to swarm one target (8v6), but also more avenues for escape.

You don't have to occupy an entire physical space to keep someone from passing through it. Just ask any basketball player.

 

[Arial Black]

You don't have to occupy an entire physical space to keep someone from passing through it. Just ask any basketball player.

And like the basketball player you would need to be trying to prevent someone passing through, not just standing there.

In the game this is represented by opportunity attacks and readied actions. Merely being there isn't enough.

 

[Shiroiken]

You don't have to occupy an entire physical space to keep someone from passing through it. Just ask any basketball player.

Umm... there are rules about how much contact can be made in basketball; they're not trying to stop a guy with a sword! Although I agree that if the players state that they're positioning to prevent passage they should be able to do so, but three characters couldn't do the same (the middle guy can't cover both).

 

[Horwath]

Hex+Square<Theater of the Mind

 

[dagger]

Personally I have not seen many problems with hex, both hex and square just have things you need to get used to. I prefer hex indoors and outdoors during combats. Especially for area effect spells like fireballs and cones.

Also if you use facing, its much better, but thats just a rare bonus since most dont.