Hexes or Squares?

Voadam · Jan 26, 2005

Whatever is handy, which is usually squares but I prefer hexes (six men instead of nine surrounding one guy is better in my mind, diagonals and area of effects are easier to do, particularly cones).

When I make simple text battle maps for our yahoo group game they are square based as it is easy to create

For example:

____A
____G
____B
D____

A=pc a
B= pc b
d= door
g= goblin

Then I can recreate it and reposition as if on a square grid with ease.

Laslo Tremaine · Jan 26, 2005

slaughterj said:
Tac-Tiles? Got a link?

My bad.

Here you go!

slaughterj · Jan 26, 2005

MerakSpielman said:
Quick question - assuming your hexes are 5' hexes - how tall or wide is the room? It seems... indeterminate.

I think the soapbox above probably covers this

As for tall/wide, I assume you mean length/width, as I didn't say whether it had a ceiling

Looking back at it, it looks to me like it's 6.5 hexes long, and 5 hexes wide. Can you clarify why you are asking? Just wondering what the confusion might be.

slaughterj · Jan 26, 2005

Laslo Tremaine said:
My bad.

Here you go!

Cool, thanks! Interesting stuff, but how is that better than just using one of those roll up maps? I have a big one of those and don't seem to have issues with people going "off-map" really (though I do have a small one too for backup). Seems a bit pricey too, but it's been a LONG time since I bought my hex maps...

frankthedm · Jan 26, 2005

My group measures

CalicoDave · Jan 26, 2005

SpiralBound said:
While, I didn't post the pic, I too only use hex maps (not due to a dislike of squares, but simply because a hex map is what I currently own) and I think I can give how .I. would answer that question. It's really not that difficult.

[soapbox]

[ snip ]

[/soapbox]

Having ~~ranted~~ said all of the above, after reading everyone's comments I'm feeling emboldened to try experimenting with other grid systems, squares and maybe even those offset squares that Intrope mentioned...

Everything you said in your soapbox is very true (I just snipped it to save quoting space). But another truism is that a group should know it's own idiosyncrasies. And I know that for my group we really, really need everything explicitly shown as accurately on the map as possible to avoid lengthy debates (stopping the game for 30 minutes or more). So people should tailor their game to fit their play style, and I do when I DM by making all room sizes divisible by 5 feet and adhereing to the grid to avoid interpretation arguments and to keep the game flowing.

SpiralBound · Jan 26, 2005

CalicoDave said:
Everything you said in your soapbox is very true (I just snipped it to save quoting space). But another truism is that a group should know it's own idiosyncrasies. And I know that for my group we really, really need everything explicitly shown as accurately on the map as possible to avoid lengthy debates (stopping the game for 30 minutes or more). So people should tailor their game to fit their play style, and I do when I DM by making all room sizes divisible by 5 feet and adhereing to the grid to avoid interpretation arguments and to keep the game flowing.

A good point. I too find it annoying when players get off track like that. I'm more prone to simply invoking GM perogative and stating that regardless of the existance of varying ways to interpret the map, when the GM says it's "25 feet wide, no flanking in the corner", then that's what it is!! Now on with the game!

CalicoDave · Jan 26, 2005

SpiralBound said:
A good point. I too find it annoying when players get off track like that. I'm more prone to simply invoking GM perogative and stating that regardless of the existance of varying ways to interpret the map, when the GM says it's "25 feet wide, no flanking in the corner", then that's what it is!! Now on with the game!

Yeah, I'd like to do it too, but my current DM is one of the worst about arguing interpretations. He won't just make decision, he makes a decision then explains why, which causes someone else to question his reasoning, and the seemingly neverending discussion is on!

Actually, 3rd edition has helped a lot. We don't have near the arguments/discussions we did under 2nd.

Conaill · Jan 27, 2005

slaughterj said:
I'm not sure what you mean by difficulties in drawing regularly shaped rooms with hexes, maybe I've used hexes for so long? For instance, I've attached just a quickly drawn room on crappy hex paper - can you (or others) explain this difficulty you have?

Actually, I think the room you drew is a good example of precisely why some people have problems with hexes: Do those 1/2 hexes at the top and bottom count as "full" hexes or not? I.e., can you stand in any partial hex, no matter how small a sliver?

It *is* possible to draw square rooms on a hex map such that all hexes are unambiguous and you never get 1/2 hexes, but it takes a little tiny bit of practice. Essentially, you need to draw your lines in between the hex gridlines. here's a graph i used a couple of times on these boards now:

Intrope · Jan 27, 2005

SpiralBound said:
While, I didn't post the pic, I too only use hex maps (not due to a dislike of squares, but simply because a hex map is what I currently own) and I think I can give how .I. would answer that question. It's really not that difficult.

[soapbox]
-snip-
[/soapbox]

Having ~~ranted~~ said all of the above, after reading everyone's comments I'm feeling emboldened to try experimenting with other grid systems, squares and maybe even those offset squares that Intrope mentioned...

Nice rant, actually. It's good to keep in mind that some things are abstractions, and not get too caught up in details.

And here's a web site with some offset-square page PDFs: Offsets (scroll down a page)

Hexes or Squares?

Voadam

Legend

Laslo Tremaine

Explorer

slaughterj

Explorer

slaughterj

Explorer

frankthedm

First Post

CalicoDave

Explorer

SpiralBound

Explorer

CalicoDave

Explorer

Conaill

First Post

Attachments

Intrope

First Post

Similar Threads