10 ft reach, 15 ft diagonals

[StoneTurtle]

I have a simply stated question. If a creature has 10 ft reach, by the rules, does he threaten the 2nd diagonal square away from him? I.e. in the diagram below, M has 10 ft reach. X are threatened squares. Are the squares marked A threatened squares?

A X X X A
X X X X X
X X M X X
X X X X X
A X X X A

If the squares marked A are not threatened, then closing with reach creatures no longer provokes an AoO. This seems silly, but then, so does allowing 10 ft reach to hit people 15 ft away or providing flanking bonuses against people they can't reach. This clears up on a hex map, but I was wondering if there were any rulings for square grids.

Thanks.

 

[wolfpunk]

Of my understanding of diagonals. You treat the first one as five feet, and the second one as ten feet. Since 10 feet clears the first diagonal, I would say that it threatens the second diagonal sqaure. That is my understanding of it and how I would do it in my game. However other opinions may and most likely will arise.

 

[Ravellion]

Yes, exactly for the reasons you already pointed out.

 

[Dr. Zoom]

This is how I do it.

When moving diagonally on the grid, the first square counts as 5 feet, the second 10, the third 5, the fourth 10, etc. This seems to work well for moving, but not for reach, so I don't use this for reach.

When reaching, I go by the basic rule. 5 foot is all the squares around you. 10 foot is the second row of squares, including the diagonals. 15 foot is the third row, etc. It is easier that way. If you begin cutting off the diagonals at 15 feet, it becomes too difficult if you have lots of creatures with 15 and 20 foot reach. And it does not happen often enough to justify the hassle, at least for me.

To answer your question, 10 foot reach should cover the diagonals and reach into the squares marked "A" on your diagram.

 

[Christian]

Heh. I mentioned this on a thread about squares vs. hexes recently.

Number one, the 5'/10' rule is a house rule. You won't find it in the PH or DMG anywhere. So by the official 3rd Edition rules this doesn't come up. It's not clear, in fact, how reach/range beyond 5' is supposed to work at all-I think you're supposed to lay down a ruler.

If you use the 5'/10' rule, which is an excellent plan IMO, then you need to make a ruling to handle this situation. However, you'll probably want to keep the 5'/10' rule in place for 15' reach (eg. whips, large characters with reach weapons) as the 'diagonal error' really starts to add up past this point. Two squares away diagonally is about 14' 2"-not a big problem to treat this as 10'. Three squares diagonally is about 21' 3", more than 20'. It doesn't make much sense to call this 15' instead of 20', does it?

Game on!

 

[Caliban]

By the core rules, I believe that your reach would cover all the corner squares.

The house rule I use in this situation is that your Reach extends halfway into the outer squares at the corners.

If somone tries to approach you via the outer corner squares, they will pass through the threatened half of the square and provoke an AoO as they enter the inner corner square.

If someone just wants to pass through the outer corners square on their way somewhere else, they can choose to move through the half of the square you don't threaten, and thus avoid provoking an attack of opportunity.

 

[Anubis]

I agree with Caliban.

The true question about the diagonal problem is whether or not the diagonals are cumulative. Let me explain.

Say you've got Haste on and you have the Spring Attack feat. What would happed if you move 1 space diagonally and then one normally, attack, move two more diagonals, attack with your partial action, and then move away on two straights and a diagonal?

Do you keep track of diagonals for every action, every turn, or simply every full diagonal movement?

 

[Fast Learner]

It seems pretty obvious that, since movement is measured in rounds, so would the diagonal totals.

Is there a problem with it?

 

[Anubis]

That makes sense. Thanks.

 

[Malin Genie]

Nice solution, Caliban.

But why not just use hexes?

In fact, UI think that could be a topic in and of itself...