Hex grid spell templates

[Zinovia]

I created some spell templates for use with 4E and our hex grid. Mine are printed out on transparency film and I think they turned out pretty well. I threw all of them together into a PDF document along with some illustrations explaining some of my decisions in making them.

Let me know if you like them! (or if you don't)

Hex grid spell templates

And the newly revised version: Revised hex grid spell templates

 

[DanmarLOK]

I don't use hex personally but that is pretty cool looking. Nice job.

 

[Nytmare]

Would it be less confusing to use things like the "burst 1" hexagon for "blast 3?" In other words have the blast number count as the number of hexes you counted across, and then use that row to describe a hexagonal area? So burst1/blast3, burst2/blast5, burst3/(and the oft used)blast7. It has the added benefit of cutting down the number of templates that you needed by a third.

How do you translate creature sizes to hexes? Do you turn their bases into triangles? It would seem like making their bases larger and larger hexes would end up making them way too big.

 

[Nytmare]

Actually, at that point, you could combine all of them into ONE template and cut the number of templates by a fourteenth!!

 

[Apeiron]

Nice work!

 

[Zinovia]

Would it be less confusing to use things like the "burst 1" hexagon for "blast 3?" In other words have the blast number count as the number of hexes you counted across, and then use that row to describe a hexagonal area? So burst1/blast3, burst2/blast5, burst3/(and the oft used)blast7. It has the added benefit of cutting down the number of templates that you needed by a third.

You could certainly do that, and it would likely be easier and less confusing. In my case, I envision blast spells as cones (like the old AD&D Cone of Cold). The drawback of using the burst spells as the default shape is that they effect fewer hexes. I opted to go for symmetry there, rather than keeping the number of hexes the same as it would have been with a square grid. I feel it makes sense for the "round" burst spells. Also fewer enemies can surround you on a hex grid (6 rather than 8), so that kind of balances it. With the shapes I chose for the blasts, I managed to keep the number of hexes the same as they would have been on a square grid.

How do you translate creature sizes to hexes? Do you turn their bases into triangles? It would seem like making their bases larger and larger hexes would end up making them way too big.

I use a lot of WotC minis, and just leave their bases as they are. If it's a larger figure, we just put it on the mat and see how many hexes are covered. If a hex is more than half covered by the base, then the creature is occupying that hex. For determining flanking, I just do a quick visual assessment to see which hexes are on opposite sides of the monster from each other. It's extremely simple with medium sized minis, as it is always clear which hex is the flanking hex for any position.

Actually, at that point, you could combine all of them into ONE template and cut the number of templates by a fourteenth!!

You could easily combine the bursts, as you've illustrated. That didn't occur to me, as I kind of like having the different templates for clarity. Also it's fun seeing the look on my players' faces when I bring out a nice big template for an area spell being cast on them. If you made the blasts the same shape (hexagonal), then yes, you could get away with a single template as you have shown. Nice work!

 

[frankthedm]

Nice work. Thank you for templates.

 

[Zinovia]

Thanks! Mine still see regular use at the table, and seem to work well for our group. I took a look at the ones you made (in your sig) and they look cool. Nice graphics on those! Mine are boring in color, but designed to be transparent so you can see the minis. I may experiment with pipe cleaners for marking area spells, since the templates would have to go *under* the minis if you were to leave them there.

 

[Nifft]

Nice templates. I love hex.

You could certainly do that, and it would likely be easier and less confusing. In my case, I envision blast spells as cones (like the old AD&D Cone of Cold). The drawback of using the burst spells as the default shape is that they effect fewer hexes. I opted to go for symmetry there, rather than keeping the number of hexes the same as it would have been with a square grid. I feel it makes sense for the "round" burst spells. Also fewer enemies can surround you on a hex grid (6 rather than 8), so that kind of balances it. With the shapes I chose for the blasts, I managed to keep the number of hexes the same as they would have been on a square grid.

I'm curious why you think it's okay to reduce the terrain unit count for Bursts, but you want to preserve the unit count for Blasts.

I wonder if it would be okay to just have a Blast be a 1-2-3 hex cone (60° cone, orient however you like). That reduces the affected terrain units from 9 -> 6... steeper than the 9 -> 7 reduction Bursts get, but not terribly so, and being able to orient a Blast freely would give Blasts more tactical strength than they currently enjoy.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Zinovia]

I didn't want to reduce the count for bursts, but I couldn't find any good way to preserve it while keeping a symmetrical shape. Blasts were easier to keep the count on because of the shape I chose, based on a cone. Having the two not match in size wasn't an ideal solution.

So I kept bursts hexagonal, and they do cover less area than their square counterparts. It is somewhat balanced by there being fewer hexes adjacent to a character (6 rather than 8), and by blasts being close. Blasts have a slightly bigger area, but you have to be right there to deliver the spell most of the time.

Making the templates circular is another option for bursts. That's what we did with fireball and the like in 3E (we still used a hex grid), but then again, the spell description said it was a 20' radius circle. What is the diameter of a square spell? (that sounds like a philosophical question, like what is the sound of one hand clapping?). How big do I make a burst one spell if I make it circular? Certainly a number could be chosen that covers about the right number of hexes, but it would involve partial hexes at the edges.

I like knowing which hexes are targeted by the spell, and we have fewer "edge" cases with the hex templates than we did with the round one in 3E. Ultimately I felt clearly showing which hexes were affected was worth the tradeoff, but I could see using pipe cleaners to make a circle of the right size and just dropping it over the enemies.

I could have made the blasts follow suit and made them hexagonal with the same count as burst spells. That certainly would follow the standard rules more closely. I wanted blast spells to be cones, because D&D has always had round spells, and cone-shaped spells. At first I tried a 60 degree arc, but it was a bit odd as far as fitting it onto the hex grid. It wound up really narrow, and to cover enough hexes it needed to be wider. So I went with 90 degrees.

Your suggestion of just making an arc-shaped template covering 60 or 90 degrees is good - pivot it around and adjudicate edge cases as with the round template. Just decide how much area it should cover.

I suppose it just depends on how you like to play. I'm not sure my group even knows that these spells are all square in the default rules, because they've virtually never played on a square grid. These templates are used by the bad guys as well, so all spells in the game work the same way, even if it's not exactly RAW. It works for us.