It only takes a minute to sign up. Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search. You can move through a hostile creature's space only if the creature is at least two sizes larger or smaller than you. If a PC has 4 enemies surrounding him on the north, south, west and east edges, is that PC unable to move? This PC can move diagonally. Doing so does not involve moving through a hostile creature's square.
Characters and monsters can move diagonally like they do horizontally and vertically, as a one-square move. From the Entering a Square section we can tell that moving into a diagonal square doesn't involve moving into either of the adjacent squares that border it: with only 5' of movement left you can enter the diagonal square. Diagonal movements can be restricted by an obstruction that completely fills the adjacent-not-diagonal squares—see the Corners section.
But that section specifically calls out terrain and trees—stationary objects, in other words—as the obstruction. A medium-sized creature does not create this type of obstruction: as described on the previous page Space , the opponent doesn't fill the square it's in. There is no recognition of the longer path between two diagonal centers than between two truly adjacent centers.
The PC can move to any of the corner-spots as one 5' portion of their movement. The DMG has alternate rules for counting diagonals as alternately 5' and 10' p.
In my opinion, the most voted answer is contradicted by the PHB and thus incorrect. You cannot move diagonally in that specific scenario illustrated in the question. In the PHB page , it states. The Knight. This Three-Rule Implementation breaks down a little bit beyond these movement ranges. For such cases, the visualizer goes up to speed, or you can chop together shorter distances. Ive read almost everything youve written now, and this is the first time i actually think youre off.
Moving 7 spaces 1,2 gets you to the exact location with just 1 rule. Moving 14 spaces, gets you within 1 space of your correct location. But since everyone follows the same rule, im not convinced more realism has a practical impact either way.
Maybe it does by interacting with a players intuition. At a glace, diagonal spaces seem farther away, until you count them.
Like Like. Glad you enjoy the blog! For tables who want a more realistic combat experience on a grid, this alternate rule is an option. You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email. What if you just got rid of squares altogether and just measured everything? Scratch my previous answer. The reason is that not moving diagonally makes things easier. If you're going from point A to point B, and point B is down and to the right of you then you could move all the way right first, then all the way down, or move right then down then right then down etc, or some combination thereof, and you're moving the same distance.
If you're moving diagonally there's going to be like one or two minimum paths, and people will be penalized who don't work it out by not being able to move as far. Zeea Spam Sweeper Staff member. RPGnet Member.
TheShadow found the shaved monkeys Validated User. Hex grids for the win. RSC Registered User. Yeah that's a good point. You could just make a whole bunch of circles or hoops representing a range of distances and use those to measure how far a character can move or what the range of a weapon is. Oh man, I just had an even better idea. A laser pointer that makes circles of a specific width based on how far it is from the surface and a switch that increases or reduces the circle by 1".
0コメント