Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ourph" data-source="post: 4105470" data-attributes="member: 20239">That's only if you consider the battlemat as an accurate representation of the imaginary universe.  It's not.  It isn't really meant to be.  It's a placeholder, a form of notation to keep track of the rules aspects of combat.  It doesn't need to correspond 1:1 with the narrative in order to be useful.  The fact is, squares in 4e are actually circles, each square on the battlemat represents one 5ft circle.  The "leftover" space between those circles doesn't exist in the game universe, it's an artifact of transferring an imaginary world onto an imperfect, real-world game-aid, nothing more.No, you stop jumping through philosophical hoops to insist there are implications.  The battlemat is a representation of the rules, it doesn't map the gameworld or the real world, in any meaningful way.  You're creating your own problem here. If it were merely an aesthetics issue, why did you bring up the race scenario as an example of how 1-1-1 diagonal movement doesn't work?  It seemed to me, from that example, you weren't really understanding the underlying assumptions that make the race scenario perfectly workable with the new system.</blockquote>