Moving diagonal 'through' enemie's squares

[morez]

_________
| A | B |
|___|___|
| C | D |
|___|___|


A Character at square C
One Enemy at square A
One Enemy at square D

It's the Character's turn and he wants to move diagonal to square B!
Is he able to move (without any tumble check or similar action) from C to B?
Of course he will get attacks of opportunity but i am really not sure if he is even able to move from B to C
IMO if either at square A or D would a static wall and the other square would be occupied by one enemy there would be no movement possible!

thanks for reply!

 

[rtricher]

As I understand it, if he moves 5' only and the area is open there is no reason why he cannot move to that square without Causing an AOO. He can then subsequently make a full attack action.

 

[Bagpuss]

According to RAW yes. It doesn't require a tumble check you can just take a 5ft step, and if you didn't mind the AoO you could even run through that mythical gap.

Of course we've house ruled it that you can't, otherwise a line of troops could only ever set up along the straight lines to block an advancing enemy, etc.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Of course we've house ruled it that you can't, otherwise a line of troops could only ever set up along the straight lines to block an advancing enemy, etc.

The error in your thinking here results from superimposing grid squares--which exist only in our fevered imaginations and for the purpose of simplifying tactical resolution--on the lines formed by such troops.

What you have really done with your house rule is reduce the number of enemies required to completely surround (i.e., trap) a Medium opponent from 8 to 4. 3e attempts to model a more dynamic combat environment, where combatants are mobile and don't just "stand there, trading blows." If you prefer to reduce the benefit gained from feats like Mobility, your house rule is fine. If that wasn't your intent, however, you might want to reconsider.

 

[Denaes]

I think if you don't want people to pass between squares like that, you would have to allow two NPCs in a square, which would most likely result in a penalty to hit/AC as they're not able to be mobile within their area and worse off if their opponent is alone in a square.

 

[Inigo Carmine]

Of course we've house ruled it that you can't, otherwise a line of troops could only ever set up along the straight lines to block an advancing enemy, etc.

Then what you've house ruled is that it takes less troops to setup along the same distance if the line is diagonal compared to when the line is vertical/horizontal.

_________
| A | B |
|___|___|
| C | D |
|___|___|

You're now covering that 15 ft line (2 diagonals = 15 ft) with only 2 enemies. If it was vertical or horizontal, you'd have to have 3 enemies to cover a 15-ft line.

If you want to cover the vertical line, put an enemy at A, B & D.

 

[TheGogmagog]

I agree with the above, by raw you can take that diagonal 5' step.

According to RAW yes. It doesn't require a tumble check you can just take a 5ft step, and if you didn't mind the AoO you could even run through that mythical gap.

I'm not sure about running, and I'm pretty sure you can't charge across them.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

I'm not sure about running, and I'm pretty sure you can't charge across them.

The only limitation on running or charging through the "gap" is that you have to be moving in a straight line. So yes, it might be difficult, but it's certainly not impossible.

 

[Deset Gled]

In situations like this, I recommend switching to hexes.

 

[Artoomis]

In situations like this, I recommend switching to hexes.

Yes!!!