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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenmarable" data-source="post: 4830279" data-attributes="member: 40359">I actually prefer the 1 square diagonal movement rules, but the example that at least made me pause is:My friend and I are in a 100' square room and the door out is directly across from us. He moves straight across the room, but I move diagonally all the way to side wall and then all the way back and we both get to the door at the same time even though I obviously moved much farther than him (it gets more absurd the larger the area we walk).Or, alternatively, have my friend and I walk the exact same paths, but rotate the grid 45 degrees and see how many squares we cover. The grid is arbitrary anyway.It makes a simulationist's head explode.Personally I sleep at night just realizing that a specific situation like that is rare, and for the most part movement is all over the place. It's easier to fudge knowing that when it's important to count squares, you are rarely just moving in a straight line and doing nothing else. But I can entirely sympathize with someone who thinks 1 square diagonals go too far in suspending disbelief (it's one thing to accept magic, it's another to accept the laws of geometry changing when you walk in a different direction). And to their credit, 1-2-1-2 is relatively accurate and not very difficult in play.But my groups have been using 1 square diagonals and just didn't realize we were doing it wrong until it became such at debate with 4e. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification