• Neato@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Generally I’ve seen it rules that the overlap needs to cover >50% of the square to affect it. In which case you have the exact same coverage as before. But in this case I’d just rule that we shift the grid 45 degrees so it lines up again and move units to the closest square that aligns. I.e. don’t use geometry to try to munchkin.

    There’s a bunch of grid-based shapes that pertain to the rules of 5e as well if you need that. Also 5e fun fact: a circle or radius affect is going to look like a square since diagonal distance is not accounted for, but in Pf2e it looks closer to an actual circle.

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I always houserule that “circles are square”, because it’s so much quicker and easier. It gets a little extreme when you do it in 3D, but I don’t overly care.

      (For fun, a double diagonal move of 5 places you at 8.66 from the start, almost 75% further than an orthangol move, but still 5 for game purposes)

    • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      but in Pf2e it looks closer to an actual circle.

      Same in PF1, and all the D&D’s before 4. I’m pretty sure most games made to be played with a battlemap have a rule for diagonals, making 4e an exception.

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      5e accounts for diagonal distance. Each second diagonal is 10ft. A 10ft. radius sphere spell would cover this pattern on the ground:

      OOOOOOO

      OOXXXOO

      OXXXXXO

      OXXXXXO

      OXXXXXO

      OOXXXOO

      OOOOOOO

      …lemmy formatting kills that but you get the point I hope.