D&D 5E Hex maps and dungeons and dragons.

[Roger]

The question that has been on my mind is why D&D defaults to squares on maps rather than hexes.

My hunch is that square graph paper was a lot easier to find in the 1970s than hex graph paper, but I'm mostly guessing here.

OTOH, the Outdoor Survival map board is, if I correctly recall, hex-based, so there's some foundation for asserting that the D&D default for outdoor and small-scale maps is hexes.



Cheers,
Roger

 

[Redthistle]

Hexes vs. Squares?

Imho, we should just be thankful that we're free to use either or none.

I'm especially grateful that I've never encountered a RPG that required the use of Penrose tiles!

 

[SkidAce]

I cannot even imagine playing theater of the mind. At my age, I'm clueless about what is going on tactically without miniatures and a clearly drawn out map.

You have some good points. Especially strings (however, we use one string that the OCD player carefully knotted at the appropriate spots so we're good).

Since 5e claimed TotM, and thats what I had dm'd back in the day, we started 5e playtests with that idea. And it worked. Loads of fun, a few inconsistencies here and there, play on.


However, the players (mostly 2e with one 3e/d20) liked their painted minis. And the ship model I had built out of styrofoam.

End result...we use a map and minis, but so far no grid. They said it helped with "relative" positioning. Especially during the barfight where they had to run around the room "subdueing people"

 

[Li Shenron]

There are issues for no grid.

Is the NPC close enough to provoke? This happened week two in Lost Mines of Phandelver for our group not using grids.

Is the guy I'm shooting an arrow at close enough to not be at disadvantage? Pull out long bow string (as opposed to short bow string, this range spell string, that range spell string, or dagger string, etc.). Alternatively, let the DM guess and his guess is sometimes way different than what is obvious to someone else at the table. With disadvantage being as harsh as it is, DM guessing seems suboptimal.

No grid is ok, but it has it's own set of problems.


I cannot even imagine playing theater of the mind. At my age, I'm clueless about what is going on tactically without miniatures and a clearly drawn out map.

Yes, but what I am trying to say when I mentioned that it's a matter of "values", is that I want to go gridless because I don't value anymore the importance to having a precise answer to questions such as "is X close enough to Y". When it's unclear, I just toss a coin or make it up. That's why I'm going gridless!

I tried TotM but then it's often hard to remember even more basic things such as who is still in the battle, so I still like having some visualization on the gaming table.

 

[Tormyr]

There are issues for no grid.

Is the NPC close enough to provoke? This happened week two in Lost Mines of Phandelver for our group not using grids.

Is the guy I'm shooting an arrow at close enough to not be at disadvantage? Pull out long bow string (as opposed to short bow string, this range spell string, that range spell string, or dagger string, etc.). Alternatively, let the DM guess and his guess is sometimes way different than what is obvious to someone else at the table. With disadvantage being as harsh as it is, DM guessing seems suboptimal.

No grid is ok, but it has it's own set of problems.

I have found that the balsa square stock from the craft store is a little easier to work with than string. Cut into 1 foot lengths and marked in 1 inch (5 foot) measurements and labeled, it is quick and easy to get a measurement. A 60 foot measurement is good enough for most things, or hold two of them together. We switched back in April for our campaign, and after a couple months, we hardly reach for the sticks anymore except for a few times each session.

As for provoking an opportunity attack, if the reach is 5 feet, you could easily rule it that bases should basically be touching (at least that is the way it would be for two minis adjacent orthogonally on a grid). I generally give within an inch between bases as being within a 5 foot reach.

 

[CM]

I'm a fan of squares for combat maps and hexes for overland maps. We do go gridless for encounters that are expected to be brief, and have all through 3e and 4e. I'm fairly generous toward the players when playing TOM, so they are more than happy to trust me.

 

[ranger69]

When I run my first 5E game in December I will be using a hex grid. That is what I have been playing with for 30+ years. However, I can see the advantages of using square grids, and no grids.
As has been mentioned I would be uncomfortable having no physical representation of who is where. There are eight in our group including me. Therefore in a combat especially that is seven characters plus however many opponent to keep track of.

However, those groups who are happy to use Theatre of the Mind are welcome to do so. No way is superior overall, just best for a particular group.

 

[Henrix]

The main advantage to any sort of grid is that it is faster than gridless.

Fewer questions about exact positions, or if using rulers (or whatnot) measuring everything.
(And I say that as an avid miniatures gamer well used to measuring.)

On a grid every player can count the distance in advance and know where they can go before it is their turn.

In my current campaign I plan to use miniatures terrain, and then not using grids, from time to time.
But I plan on not sweating it and give everyone a measuring stick, and have templates for cones and such.



Square grids and counting every two diagonals as three gives almost as good precision as hexes. Fiddlier, though.

 

[Kaychsea]

My only quibble with square grids is the diagonal sprint.

 

[KarinsDad]

My only quibble with square grids is the diagonal sprint.

Replace squares with offset squares and that problem goes away.