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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 271690" data-attributes="member: 2011">This is one of the reasons I always use hexes. Any two adjacent hexes always have a hex line between them, not the line between squares n-s and e-w vs. the point between adjacent square nw-se, ne-sw.At any rate, I think the rules are clear on this.You can move diagonally if both squares are unoccupied. Period.The rules do NOT state that you can only move diagonally if a side square is vacant. That's a house rule. It's a good house rule, but a house rule nonetheless.If the Villain in the original example did not want the Rogue tumbling past him, he should have been in space 5 instead of space 3.If the DM says that there is a large enough gap there for a person to get through, sure.If he says that there is no gap or the gap is too small, no.Just like if the DM says that there is a wall between squares A and B, you cannot move through.* A B *Again, you can walk between them since the rules allow it.Simple. You have to close all paths through.* 1 2 ** E E ** 3 4 *The enemies here close all paths through.* 1 2 ** E 3 ** E 4 *The enemies here do not close all paths through.* 1 2 ** E 3 ** 4 E *The enemies here do not close all paths through.The rule is A.Just because there is no rule B that reinforces A in a given questionable situation does not mean that you can infer that a rule C that countermands rule A must exist.Neither rule B nor rule C exist, hence, you have to rely on rule A (unless you are rule zeroing it).</blockquote>

Verification