Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ourph" data-source="post: 4104719" data-attributes="member: 20239">You're thinking of this the wrong way.  Of course it's ridiculous for one side of a race to agree to run a different distance than the other.  But that's not what's happening when you abstract the race onto the battlemat.  If the participants agree to run 100ft then, by the 4e rules, the people running NSEW all run 20 squares (because 1sq=5ft) and the people running diagonals all run 20 squares (and because 1sq=5ft on the abstract representation of the imaginary world depicted by the battlemat, these people ALSO run exactly 100ft).There is no contradiction here and the characters in the imaginary world aren't required to think in squares at all.  The characters can negotiate the distance of the race in farthings for all the rules care, as long as the DM does the conversion between farthings and squares when he's transferring the action to the battlemat.  The only reason your example doesn't work is because you keep insisting that the 1-1-1 rule takes place in a system that recognizes that the distance between opposite corners of a square is different than the distance between opposite sides.  4e's abstraction doesn't recognize this.  To the 4e movement system, the distance from any point on a square to the point on the opposite side is always exactly 5ft.Stop thinking that the battlemat is supposed to be an accurate depiction of real world topology and it will make more sense.  The battlemat is a convenient abstraction, nothing more.  The 1-1-1 diagonal movement rules are just an extension of that convenient abstraction.</blockquote>

Verification