|
4 years ago ::
Nov 19, 2009 - 8:42PM
#61
|
Date Joined:
Jan 24, 2009
|
if you measure the distance from any of the corners to the coresponding corner of the squares you are refeing to i guarantee that the distance will be diferent.. I'm going with longer..
Ok.
PH 273:
Counting Distance: When counting the distance
from one square to another, start counting from any
adjacent square (even one that is diagonally adjacent
but around a corner) and then count around solid
obstacles that fill their squares. You must choose the
most direct path to a target when counting squares for
range or when determining the extent of an area of
effect.
Using these rules, it seems that all 3 squares are in fact the same distance away.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 19, 2009 - 8:48PM
#62
|
Date Joined:
Nov 15, 2009
|
ok i agree that is the case but which then is the nearest of those 3?
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 19, 2009 - 8:49PM
#63
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2007
|
ok i agree that is the case but which then is the nearest of those 3?
neither, all three are exactly the same distance away for all that D&D cares.
 Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 19, 2009 - 8:59PM
#64
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
4e is a little wonky, using squares for distance. It's very clear how you can push/pull/slide - and, depending on the exact relative positions, you can often 'push' enemies off at odd angles, cause them to zigzag, or even 'turn' in mid-push. That's just the way the rules work, all pushing says is that each square you push them into has to be farther away than the last.
That's not what charge says. Charge just says 'directly' to the 'nearest' square. 'Nearest' is also wonky due to the way squares are counted for distance. If you're facing an enemy corner-on, you have exactly one closest square. If you're closer to him along a row or column, you have three 'closest' squares. It wouldn't be unreasonable for the DM to invoke common sense and use the /really/ closest square, but it also wouldn't be unreasonable to just let you choose one of the three.
'Directly' is even more obtuse. Counting distances is covered, what constitutes a 'direct' path is not. You could use the same sort of rules as pulling and pushing, and assume that any movement that brings you closer with each square moved is 'direct' - and, you could, in that case, charge 'arround' almost any obstacle using diagonal movement, if you're charging more or less along a row/column (though, if the nearest square is along a diagonal, you're back to a straight line). Or, you could default to natural language, and assume it means something close to a straight line (straight line movement is impossible in 4e if you're not moving along a row, column, or diagonal - the best you can do is aproximate it).
In neither case would charging around a hard corner (one you can't diagonally move across) likely work. You'd end up taking some movement that didn't bring you closer to the target, so even the pull/push-based ruling would have to say you couldn't do it.
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 19, 2009 - 9:03PM
#65
|
Date Joined:
Nov 15, 2009
|
best to leave it to the dm to decide at the time you never know I might even feel nice one day
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 19, 2009 - 9:04PM
#66
|
Date Joined:
Jul 19, 2007
|
ok i agree that is the case but which then is the nearest of those 3?
Two paragraphs after the Counting Distance on page 273 is the Nearest Creature or Square description:
When two or more squares are equally close, you can pick either one as the nearest.
_________________________________________________
"Jacking up the level rewards has always carried the taint of bribery, in my mind. If people need to be bribed to play D&D, then something's wrong with the game."
-Steve Winter (http://www.howlingtower.com/2012/01/illusory-math.html)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 20, 2009 - 7:28AM
#67
|
|
|
While direct is not defined at all (even their answers says it's not defined), nearest is. Nearest is clearly a reference to distance and distance is clearly defined in 4th ed.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 20, 2009 - 7:41AM
#68
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2003
|
was a good comment on this from a staffer HERE the relevant bits: Charging was a set of questions. Really weird how complicated people made this. Straight line, no straight line. Can I run 5 feet around something and then be okay if I have 4 more squares to move, or if I run in a straight line and and have to curve around the last 5 feet, will that be okay? Folks, its 4E. It is supposed to be simplified on purpose. The rules in the PHB page 287 couldn't be simpler. Did you move directly to a square that is adjacent to the target? If it is a legal move, ... then the charge is okay. Period. And even if you make a mistake on this, ... you'll notice heavy duty balance in powers these days. Letting a guy slip a questionable charge in is not a game unbalancing issue, and if you're holding up the whole game to bust out protractors and slide rules, ... you're playing the wrong game.
INSIDE SCOOP GAMERS: In the new version of D&D, it will no longer be "Edition Wars." It will be "Edition Lair Assault." - dungeonbastard
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 20, 2009 - 7:47AM
#69
|
|
|
And yet he manages to answer nothing. Just tell us what directly means in this context.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Nov 20, 2009 - 8:07AM
#70
|
|
|
Referring back to 3E for its rules seems even less appropriate in this scenario than in other cases. While it's been a long time since I played it didn't diagonal movement in 3E cost more movement? As such when talking about straight lines, distance, etc. in 4E then 3E distance and direct determinations don't make sense because of the distance differences.
|
|
|
