Weirdo |

Diagonals: When measuring distance, the first diagonal counts as 1 square, the second counts as 2 squares, the third counts as 1, the fourth as 2, and so on.

Spermy The Cat |

Core Rulebook p193 wrote:Diagonals: When measuring distance, the first diagonal counts as 1 square, the second counts as 2 squares, the third counts as 1, the fourth as 2, and so on.

Just for clarification, what if you move diagonally, then straight, then diagonally again? Is it 5-5-5 or 5-5-10?

E: "Which printing?"

Weirdo |

1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Not sure what printing I've got. I think they do try to make sure the page numbers line up so it should be the same page regardless.

In any case look in the combat chapter under Movement, Position and Distance; Measuring Distance; Diagonals.

EDIT: By the way, this is a very silly thing to risk a friendship for.

Spermy The Cat |

Ok, so we just talked on the phone, and it turns out we had...a miscommunication. The last time we played, I told him the movement stacks regardless of sequence. He interpreted that as the feet used, not the squares.

So I said 5-10-5, and he thought I said 5-10-15. He says "it's still a dumb holdover from earlier D&D because it breaks the game anyways."

I'm...annoyed.

Serisan |

Ok, so we just talked on the phone, and it turns out we had...a miscommunication. The last time we played, I told him the movement stacks regardless of sequence. He interpreted that as the feet used, not the squares.

So I said 5-10-5, and he thought I said 5-10-15. He says "it's still a dumb holdover from earlier D&D because it breaks the game anyways."

I'm...annoyed.

Squares are a bad holdover. Diagonal movement rules keep you from having interior spherical maps due to distance traveled diagonally curving "up" when every square is 5'.

Saethori |

4 people marked this as a favorite. |

I always felt hex maps made more sense.

We aren't friends anymore.

I mean, we weren't friends before, I never met you before now, but this, *this*... you overstepped the lines of our friendship that I didn't know we had before but certainly don't have now.

(But yeah, diagonals are tricky, but so are hexes if you don't have appropriate maps)

Galnörag |

aboyd wrote:To be fair, in D&D 5th edition, they did away with the 5-10 diagonals. Everything is just 5' movement. Maybe this person's friend is thinking of that.Dang, i'd so take advantage of that. The only fair way to make all movement 5 feet is a hexagonal grid.

But yeah you are right

The change in diagonals was introduced in 4e,and continued into 5.

Byakko |

aboyd wrote:To be fair, in D&D 5th edition, they did away with the 5-10 diagonals. Everything is just 5' movement. Maybe this person's friend is thinking of that.Dang, i'd so take advantage of that. The only fair way to make all movement 5 feet is a hexagonal grid.

But yeah you are right

Pity about most of the advanced world liking to use rectangular structures in their buildings.

Hex grids also are slightly unfair when comparing N/S movement to E/W.

Saethori |

1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Mulgar wrote:aboyd wrote:To be fair, in D&D 5th edition, they did away with the 5-10 diagonals. Everything is just 5' movement. Maybe this person's friend is thinking of that.Dang, i'd so take advantage of that. The only fair way to make all movement 5 feet is a hexagonal grid.

But yeah you are right

Pity about most of the advanced world liking to use rectangular structures in their buildings.

Hex grids also are slightly unfair when comparing N/S movement to E/W.

And this... is my precise aversion to hex grids. A lot of what goes on in campaigns I GM tend to involve buildings of some sort, and more combat occurs in structures than out of them.

I could just switch between as the party gets involved in urban vs outdoor, but I think that would just get incredibly complicated and disorienting.

pH unbalanced |

Byakko wrote:Mulgar wrote:aboyd wrote:But yeah you are right

Pity about most of the advanced world liking to use rectangular structures in their buildings.

Hex grids also are slightly unfair when comparing N/S movement to E/W.

And this... is my precise aversion to hex grids. A lot of what goes on in campaigns I GM tend to involve buildings of some sort, and more combat occurs in structures than out of them.

I could just switch between as the party gets involved in urban vs outdoor, but I think that would just get incredibly complicated and disorienting.

Which is essentially how they did it in 1st edition, since all the indoor maps were in squares and the outdoor maps in hexes.

Back when all distances were in inches, but an inch was 10 ft indoors and 30 ft outdoors.

I prefer hexes as well, but I've learned to roll with squares just fine.

In my home games I run with the house rule that "Geometry always wins."

Snowlilly |

Grimmy wrote:I'm on my 3rd marriage thanks to these damn diagonals.I can't tell you how many friends I've lost over this same issue. I used to have so much love in my life, now I am all alone.

** spoiler omitted **

A man should never allow a woman to measure him on the diagonal.

He always comes up short.

Khudzlin |

A man should never allow a woman to measure him on the diagonal.

He always comes up short.

Indeed, counting every other diagonal as 2 squares is equivalent to approximating sqrt(2) with 1.5 (for ~1.414, so a ~6% error). And that's when staying on the same level. If you go 3d and use cubes, you have to think not only about crossing edges (the same as diagonals on the same level), but also about crossing vertices. The distance for that is sqrt(3) (1 being the edge length), so the best approximation is counting every second and third vertex-crossing as 2 squares. That gives you 1 (for ~1.732), 3 (for ~3.464) and 5 (for ~5.196), which yields a ~4% error the other way. Using hexes eliminates the rounding error, but opens up a whole new can of worms in 3d, since there are 2 ways to place a new level of hexes over the first one.

Atarlost |

aboyd wrote:But yeah you are right

Hexagons are not circles.

Any movement rule is fair if the distance metric is consistent.

Pathfinder isn't. Spell area templates use Pythagorean Distance. Movement made over successive 5' steps uses Chebychev distance. Movement made in a single round uses a horrible bastardization of Chebychev and Manhattan distance.

odd diagonal doubled movement is possibly the worst thing you can do. A halfling moving travels farther diagonally in 3 turns than a human does in 2 because each turn starts counting at 5'.