My DM uses this rule. Martials deal with it for movement and attacks, but it affects spell range too. Wanna Guiding Bolt a baddie 120ft away diagonally? You'd better move position, son, because that's not how a hypotenuse works.
I disregard this when I DM. I don't care if it breaks geometry, it slows down combat when people have to count funny and re-evaluate their turns because they don't have the movement or range to do what they want. Also, I never liked geometry in school and this is my fantasy world, so I'm happy to stick it to Pythagoras.
I know it affects spell ranges, but for example you said guiding bolt is 120 feet, fireball (one of the most used spells in d&d's history) has a range of 150 feet, the diagonal rule really only changes these spells if the map of combat is huge, which unless you're running a lair or any WoTC module, almost never happens. meanwhile, my ranger who has to actually move in weird ways just to be able to target certain enemies, which is why I agree that it slows down combat.
...That was just the first spell with a ranged attack that came to mind. Many if not most commonly used spells have shorter range. When your Poison Spray or Blight or Counterspell or Grasping Vine or Hold Person or Healing Word or Fear or any other 60- or 30-foot (or less) range spell is beyond your movement because of a stupid diagonal, it definitely affects how you play your caster.
Also, it has implications for defensive tactics, too. Range usually means safety, so when a baddie has an AoE effect and your squishy, ranged caster can only attack/buff/heal if you enter that AoE because of a diagonal...yeah. But yes, my main issue with this optional rule is that it slows things down and doesn't add much to the game in return.
Not according to the 5e Optional Rule in the DMG that the OP is referring to, so you’re wrong.
Read what I wrote again. I'm talking about when you're not using the optional rule.
Interesting. Just read the PHB again, in the Combat Movement & Positioning area, and the rules in grid movement are listed as a “Variant.” That just seems so far out of whack to me, with D&D from 3.0 and on.
The AoE would also be affected by the rule. If you would be affected under the variant diagonals rule, then you'd still have been affected under the... normal... variant rule. I mean the grid without any bells and whistles.
I’ve been using it for a while, and thinking I should switch back actually. But while on the topic of combat options, what do you guys think of the arc facing rules? I don’t think it should slow combat down toooooo much but I think it has some cool possibilities.
I think it really depends on how your players play, for example I have a lot of players who hate micromanaging in combat, so I just decided to leave the rule out, I also had a lot of arguments that the face rule was only hurting martials because of shields, and that martials in melee could easily get destroyed while the spellcasters who sit back have nothing to worry about, they just pick the direction of the spell they cast.
I personally just use the basic rules for movement, but sometimes templates make it easier especially for Air/Water enviornments where you have 3D movement or any time there's a question on "does it reach".
I strictly use 5' squares since 2008 when 4th Editions rolled out but appreciate the inclusion of the Optional rule: Diagonal in the Dungeon Master Guide, even though i think supporters of 5/10 would most likely have kept houseruling out squares measurements anyways. What the optional rule does is inform about the possibility to those who might not have played during 3.E eras or AD&D 2nd Edition Player's Options where i believe it was first introduced at the end of the 90's
I don't mind playing with the Diagonal Rule, and in fact is the norm in my usual playgroup, since most (even me being the youngest) started playing in 2e (theater of the mind and paper drawings) and 3.5e (we heavily used minis and a big squared map for tactics and measures), so it doesnt affect us much. Even the VTTs we play now can be set to either rule (sometimes the dm forgets which rule is set in the map until we start combat).
I have played with the default rule in 5e, and its ok: you move "faster", people don't take longer on their turns because of movement and Circles are Squares AoEs, its a benefit and a hindrance both in tactics and "realism" (both ways), but in the end its just a rule you play with and adjust.
I personally like the diagonal rule, even if its slower, because it feels more realistic.
I dump that sort of realism for a more fast paced play/combat (in a game with flying firedragons and magic and stuff). In extreme situations, like someone is casting a spell with a globe effect while everyone is free floating in a 3d environment, i enlist the help of simple measurement tools to determine if something is in reach or no.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Read what I wrote again. I'm talking about when you're not using the optional rule.
...That was just the first spell with a ranged attack that came to mind. Many if not most commonly used spells have shorter range. When your Poison Spray or Blight or Counterspell or Grasping Vine or Hold Person or Healing Word or Fear or any other 60- or 30-foot (or less) range spell is beyond your movement because of a stupid diagonal, it definitely affects how you play your caster.
Also, it has implications for defensive tactics, too. Range usually means safety, so when a baddie has an AoE effect and your squishy, ranged caster can only attack/buff/heal if you enter that AoE because of a diagonal...yeah. But yes, my main issue with this optional rule is that it slows things down and doesn't add much to the game in return.
Interesting. Just read the PHB again, in the Combat Movement & Positioning area, and the rules in grid movement are listed as a “Variant.” That just seems so far out of whack to me, with D&D from 3.0 and on.
The AoE would also be affected by the rule. If you would be affected under the variant diagonals rule, then you'd still have been affected under the... normal... variant rule. I mean the grid without any bells and whistles.
I’ve been using it for a while, and thinking I should switch back actually. But while on the topic of combat options, what do you guys think of the arc facing rules? I don’t think it should slow combat down toooooo much but I think it has some cool possibilities.
you're referring to the face rule right?
I think it really depends on how your players play, for example I have a lot of players who hate micromanaging in combat, so I just decided to leave the rule out, I also had a lot of arguments that the face rule was only hurting martials because of shields, and that martials in melee could easily get destroyed while the spellcasters who sit back have nothing to worry about, they just pick the direction of the spell they cast.
Another important thing the Optional rule: Diagonal affect is reach requiring 15 feet reach to attack two diagonals away from you.
When playing on a VTT, it is easier just to switch off the grid and use the VTT's measuring tool to move tokens around the correct distance.
I personally just use the basic rules for movement, but sometimes templates make it easier especially for Air/Water enviornments where you have 3D movement or any time there's a question on "does it reach".
I strictly use 5' squares since 2008 when 4th Editions rolled out but appreciate the inclusion of the Optional rule: Diagonal in the Dungeon Master Guide, even though i think supporters of 5/10 would most likely have kept houseruling out squares measurements anyways. What the optional rule does is inform about the possibility to those who might not have played during 3.E eras or AD&D 2nd Edition Player's Options where i believe it was first introduced at the end of the 90's
I don't mind playing with the Diagonal Rule, and in fact is the norm in my usual playgroup, since most (even me being the youngest) started playing in 2e (theater of the mind and paper drawings) and 3.5e (we heavily used minis and a big squared map for tactics and measures), so it doesnt affect us much. Even the VTTs we play now can be set to either rule (sometimes the dm forgets which rule is set in the map until we start combat).
I have played with the default rule in 5e, and its ok: you move "faster", people don't take longer on their turns because of movement and Circles are Squares AoEs, its a benefit and a hindrance both in tactics and "realism" (both ways), but in the end its just a rule you play with and adjust.
I personally like the diagonal rule, even if its slower, because it feels more realistic.
I dump that sort of realism for a more fast paced play/combat (in a game with flying firedragons and magic and stuff). In extreme situations, like someone is casting a spell with a globe effect while everyone is free floating in a 3d environment, i enlist the help of simple measurement tools to determine if something is in reach or no.