OK. This might be a silly question, but it seems like it needs to be asked. Also, it might end up being a "ask your DM" type thing.
When playing on a grid, with squares representing 5' sections, what stops me positioning something so it is within a 5' square between those two squares?
For example: Cloud of Daggers takes up a 5' square area. There are two monsters standing next to each other on the grid and I want them to both be affected by the cloud of daggers. So, I put the cloud of daggers so that it is 2 1/2' inside one of the squares and 2 1/2' inside the other square. So, it is taking up 5' and includes both monsters. Is this allowed for the purposes of a spell such as cloud of daggers? Does a creature have to be completely inside the spell's area to be affected by the spell?
Another example. A Dragonborn's breath for some of them is a line. 5' x 30'. If there are 5 enemies staggered in such a way that they are not in a line but are still within 5' of each other, can I position the breath weapon to go "between" their squares, thereby targetting all of them?
This his will probably be defined in a module, but this is pretty standard.
The DM. The DM decided to use a grid, the DM tells you how to use it. Ta da!
Also, nothing. Try going gridless and using a tape measure. The game works fine and you can center your spells where ever you like and use actual cones and circles for spell effects. Or a 1" square for that matter.
Right. So, on the picture Elenduin posted, imagine a line running along the grid line. Would that be able to get both sets of creatures assuming they are lined up on either side of that line?
Elenduin wrote:
The point of using a grid is to more or less force everything to "snap" to the squares of the grid, for ease of play and bookkeeping. Thus, in my opinion, if you have a 5' square to place on a grid of 5' squares, it must necessarily go into one square. Anything with a dimension that isn't divisible by 5 should either extend to the edge of the last square it occupies or be cut off at the last full square it occupied.
So, no, I would only allow cloud of daggers to be cast into one 5' square, and damage anything that passes through/starts its turn in that square.
If a spell has a 5' radius, however, I would position it on an axis so it it reaches into 4 squares. In this case, the simplified diagonal rules (and use of only squares on the grid) allow it to affect a 10' square instead of a 10' diameter circle.
Undrhil wrote:
2Chlorobutanal wrote:
Kalani wrote:
RedSiegfried wrote:
Elenduin wrote:
Sherman wrote:
The DM should decide that. Personally when i DM with a grid with squares defined as 5 feet, then area of effect are applied by 5 ft square increment and originate where lines intersect since the grid delimit each 5 feet spaces. So Cloud of Daggers would affect 1 square (5 feet space).
I've been considering this question as well, would most people agree with the origin being an intersection of lines or a square? I've been thinking of using squares for stuff that hits a circle.
For cones it's easier, origin is caster and the affected area is X number of squares forward with X being the length. So the first square is 1 forward 1 wide, while the 5th square up affects 5 squares. That's a bad example. let's see if I can type it...
1
2 2
3 3 3
4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5
Naa, that's just how it's was done in other editions iirc. Like I said 5e hasn't come out with their version yet.
RedSiegfried wrote:
IIRC a dev (Mike Mearls on twitter or Rodney Thompson in Rules of Three) said that point of origins used intersecting lines on a grid.
Chaosmancer wrote:
According to Mike Shea and one of is articles http://slyflourish.com/4e_dms_guide_to_5e.html
- Narrative Combat: The DM describes the scene, players describe the actions of their PCs, dice are rolled, and the DM describes the outcome.
- Abstract Sketches: The DM draws loose sketches, not to scale, to show some details of an area. Players describe where they want to go, and the DM adjudicates.
- Abstract Combat on Tactical Maps: The DM uses a battle map but combat distances are abstracted. The grid doesn't really mean anything or might measure distances greater than 5 feet.
- 4e-style Gridded Combat: Squares are five feet and much of the battle takes place as it did in 4th edition. Diagonal movement just counts as a square and bursts and blasts are done in the style of 4th edition.
- 3.5e and Pathfinder Style Gridded combat: Combat takes place on a grid, Every other diagonal move counts as 10 feet, bursts and blasts are as close to circular as you can make them.
I myself like using a grid (or any sort of visual representation- and just "eyeball" it); trying to keep track of everyone and everything in my "theatre of the mind," is a bit much for me (especially, if I have to step away from the table, e.g., go to the bathroom, and then have to construct a revised "theatre of mind"- "where are the orcs now?" "Where's the fighter?" "Where's the cleric?" "I need to know for Sneak Attack", "I have the Sentinel Feat," "Do I have to Disenage?" "Is somebody in front of me?" Three Blind Mice, etc), and using some sort of visual representation spares me in having to ask the DM "a million" questions, or if I'm dm, then spared being asked "6 million" questions by the players, given that many game elements rely on positioning. Moreover, dnd was originally a game of miniatures and battlemaps, measured in inches, thus, I don't lose out on any sort of "old school" feel. In all, I just find having visual representations more efficient. But to each their own (its when its a mixed group seems to present a problem; and I despise the rule the dm is always right- "Mother may I?" I have yet to meet a dm that doesn't let rule 0 go to his or her head; for sometimes the dm is funky. Whereas, I like sticking to objectivity. I don't know if there are special guidlines for organized play in reference to the rule the dm is always right- but I can see such a rule ending in unesessary disaster for one or more players, via a DM's whim. If a dm tries to do such power-tripping when I start orgainzed play, I'll be walking out. But I digress).
For grid play, I simply use 4ed measurements (for example, a cone is just a blast- I find it makes them slightly more powerful), until the new DM's guide comes out. In some cases, it does limit area of effect, namely for things that would only affect 1 square, so for 1 square situations, I instead make it affect 2 squares and adjudicate to the best of my ability; it's not perfect, but neither are any of the other methods.
RedSiegfried wrote:
Sherman wrote:
Sherman wrote: