Okay, where do you stand on diagonal movement?

[EricNoah]

1-2-1-2 works well and accurately enough for me.

 

[hexgrid]

That said, I would love to see some write-ups for the flanking rules, movement rules, and such, on a hex grid. Does anyone have any, for 3rd Edition and higher?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/hexGrid.htm

It's taken from Unearthed Arcana.

 

[Grossout]

For distance and movement rates, we're using the "just eyeball it," "eh, close enough" and "if it lets something cool happen, they can get there" systems.

Love your approach! I may just use it as well, although the 1-1-1-1 grid idea is starting to sound simple enough to try.

 

[delericho]

In my opinion, the 1-1-1-1 diagonal movement is the single worst mechanical aspect of 4e that has thus far been revealed.

Worse still, according to at least one former skeptic of the rule, house ruling back to 1-2-1-2 is likely to have balance consequences on various powers and other mechanics, probably meaning that it isn't a reasonable thing to do. Fantastic.

 

[alaric]

I can't believe you guys deal with the horrible abstraction of 1-2-1-2, when it's perfectly easy to count 1.414213562373095048801688724209-1.414213562373095048801688724209-1.414213562373095048801688724209-1.414213562373095048801688724209.

 

[parvatiquinta]

Because I'd never seen anyone defend it until a little earlier today, and because I don't see how it differs from 1-2-1-2 in practise.

If you move 4 diagonal squares it will even out; but it won't if you move 1, or 3, or any other odd number.

It's not harder at all than 1-1-1-1 as far as remembering goes, and for adding numbers up it makes no difference at all if you're using metres and not feet at your table (5 feet are approximated to 1.5 metres anyway).

EDIT: 5 feet, of course.

 

[Gundark]

other....don't care either way

 

[jeffh]

If you move 4 diagonal squares it will even out; but it won't if you move 1, or 3, or any other odd number.

That depends on your rounding conventions. If you round down, it works out the same as 1-2-1-2; if you don't it works out more like 2-1-2-1, which I'll own up to not having thought about, but which, again, I haven't seen anyone defend.

It's not harder at all than 1-1-1-1 as far as remembering goes, and for adding numbers up it makes no difference at all if you're using metres and not feet at your table (10 feet are approximated to 1.5 metres anyway).

Huh?

 

[jeffh]

In my opinion, the 1-1-1-1 diagonal movement is the single worst mechanical aspect of 4e that has thus far been revealed.

Worse still, according to at least one former skeptic of the rule, house ruling back to 1-2-1-2 is likely to have balance consequences on various powers and other mechanics, probably meaning that it isn't a reasonable thing to do. Fantastic.

I think I refuted that argument in the first post of this thread. At the very least I challenged it; it would help, of course, if those making the argument would give more than a vague idea of where exactly the imbalance is supposed to be.

 

[jeffh]

I can't believe you guys deal with the horrible abstraction of 1-2-1-2, when it's perfectly easy to count 1.414213562373095048801688724209-1.414213562373095048801688724209 -1.414213562373095048801688724209-1.414213562373095048801688724209.

Amusing as that is, could you put some spaces in there? It's forcing a horizontal scroll bar on my monitor.