Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 4069644" data-attributes="member: 1757">See, I think this &quot;side note&quot; of yours actually hits the nail on the hand as to why 1-1-1-1 diagonals aren't a bad idea. Squares are an approximation of normal movement to begin with; A creature that occupies a 10' x 10' space is usually not a gigantic cube, and the way that a spread or burst affects creatures in squares along its edge is basically an abstraction. So is movement; I probably move within my square when making a Reflex save, and I certainly don't move in exact multiples of 5'. So it's an abstraction. The question is really: How much of an abstraction can you tolerate? Is it okay that you can't move two squares diagonally if you have 10 feet of movement, or not? Is it okay that a monster can as easily move around a blocking fighter to get at the wizard as that same monster can move straight at him? (Which actually isn't even the case, since going 3 squares diagonally and 3 back precludes the option of a charge.) As I said, I'll probably just avoid this entire issue by using line measurements, but I think either way is a legit option. I will say that creatures effectively being unable to move 10' diagonally is a bit of a problem if the game incorporates more 10' blocks of movement, but others probably don't have that issue.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ruleslawyer, post: 4069644, member: 1757"] See, I think this "side note" of yours actually hits the nail on the hand as to why 1-1-1-1 diagonals aren't a bad idea. Squares are an [b]approximation[/b] of normal movement to begin with; A creature that occupies a 10' x 10' space is usually not a gigantic cube, and the way that a spread or burst affects creatures in squares along its edge is basically an abstraction. So is movement; I probably move within my square when making a Reflex save, and I certainly don't move in exact multiples of 5'. So it's an abstraction. The question is really: How much of an abstraction can you tolerate? Is it okay that you can't move two squares diagonally if you have 10 feet of movement, or not? Is it okay that a monster can as easily move around a blocking fighter to get at the wizard as that same monster can move straight at him? (Which actually isn't even the case, since going 3 squares diagonally and 3 back precludes the option of a charge.) As I said, I'll probably just avoid this entire issue by using line measurements, but I think either way is a legit option. I will say that creatures effectively being unable to move 10' diagonally is a bit of a problem if the game incorporates more 10' blocks of movement, but others probably don't have that issue. [/QUOTE]

Verification