A Different Way to Handle 1 2 1 2

[KarinsDad]

I was looking at different graphs and came up with the following idea. Use an Octagonal grid (like this one). Whenever a creature moves into a larger octagon, it takes 2 move. When it moves diagonally, it moves into the smaller 1 move Diamond (or tilted Square) and then into the larger 2 Octagonal.

So, any diagonal movement results in 3, any horizontal or vertical movement results in 2. Course, the movement system would need to be doubled (i.e. 12 Move instead of 6). But, this would make it visually easier for players to count out their movement.

 

[D'karr]

I was looking at different graphs and came up with the following idea. Use an Octagonal grid (like this one). Whenever a creature moves into a larger octagon, it takes 2 move. When it moves diagonally, it moves into the smaller 1 move Diamond (or tilted Square) and then into the larger 2 Octagonal.

So, any diagonal movement results in 3, any horizontal or vertical movement results in 2. Course, the movement system would need to be doubled (i.e. 12 Move instead of 6). But, this would make it visually easier for players to count out their movement.

That's an interesting proposition and the math works out. You can do the same with a square grid simply by using the same math.

In addition the octagonal grid makes drawing on it even more difficult than a Hex Grid. So if I had such a problem with diagonals I'd just use a HEX GRID.

 

[Mr Jack]

What happens when their move ends in a diamond?

 

[KarinsDad]

That's an interesting proposition and the math works out. You can do the same with a square grid simply by using the same math.

Yup. This was just the addition of a visual cue.

In addition the octagonal grid makes drawing on it even more difficult than a Hex Grid. So if I had such a problem with diagonals I'd just use a HEX GRID.

Well, I probably will be using a Hex Grid for 4E.

But, I don't see any drawing issues with Octagons. Pretend that they are squares. I think people overreact a little to "drawing issues". Handling them is a mindset.

 

[KarinsDad]

What happens when their move ends in a diamond?

Just like diagonal movement in 3E where it comes up 2 required and the player only has 1 left over, either don't allow it or add a house rule to allow it.

 

[D'karr]

Yup. This was just the addition of a visual cue.

Well, I probably will be using a Hex Grid for 4E.

But, I don't see any drawing issues with Octagons. Pretend that they are squares. I think people overreact a little to "drawing issues". Handling them is a mindset.

Well, you're not really simplifying movement then. You are introducing a visual representation that is more complicated for drawing than either a square grid or a hex grid.

If the math works the same with a square grid and I don't have to change my mindset to draw on it, what really does this solve?

 

[KarinsDad]

Well, you're not really simplifying movement then. You are introducing a visual representation that is more complicated for drawing than either a square grid or a hex grid.

It's not more complicated. One just uses it as a square grid and ignores the diamonds when drawing. That really is not complicated at all. Maybe you are looking for a different word than complicated.

If the math works the same with a square grid and I don't have to change my mindset to draw on it, what really does this solve?

It gives people with a different mindset (than possibly yours) another option. If it works for someone, fine. If it doesn't, fine.

The idea is to throw out options and use the ones which work for different people. If this one does not work for you, that's fine. It might work for someone else.

That's one of the reasons to come to the forums. To share ideas. If this idea doesn't work for anyone, that's ok too. It shared an idea which might spark another different idea in someone else.

 

[FabioMilitoPagliara]

I was looking at different graphs and came up with the following idea. Use an Octagonal grid (like this one). Whenever a creature moves into a larger octagon, it takes 2 move. When it moves diagonally, it moves into the smaller 1 move Diamond (or tilted Square) and then into the larger 2 Octagonal.

So, any diagonal movement results in 3, any horizontal or vertical movement results in 2. Course, the movement system would need to be doubled (i.e. 12 Move instead of 6). But, this would make it visually easier for players to count out their movement.

why don't use hex? it's simpler and more efficient (there was an old wargame with square and octagon never liked)

only problem you must redifine all the close burs in a cone form.... it's just equal saying

close burs x = ca. cone x*1.3

 

[D'karr]

It's not more complicated. One just uses it as a square grid and ignores the diamonds when drawing. That really is not complicated at all. Maybe you are looking for a different word than complicated.

Okay, maybe I'm not expressing this correctly. The octagonal grid creates a visual representation that does not "simplify" a square grid, for drawing purposes.

It gives people with a different mindset (than possibly yours) another option. If it works for someone, fine. If it doesn't, fine.

I understand that and agree. Use what works for you.

The idea is to throw out options and use the ones which work for different people. If this one does not work for you, that's fine. It might work for someone else.

Totally agree.

That's one of the reasons to come to the forums. To share ideas. If this idea doesn't work for anyone, that's ok too. It shared an idea which might spark another different idea in someone else.

Correct, but if an idea does not provide significant value for the investment in it, then we can discuss how it does not do that or what other options exist that in fact do so.

My point is that your math solution already solves the perceived "problem." In addition, it does so in a square grid without adding any "significant" complexity. However, your visual representation does create a more complex solution and not a very satisfying one, when you consider that your math already solves the problem.

For example the question about what happens if I end my move in a diamond?

 

[Andur]

There is a hang up with the 1-2-1 movement scale.

Guess what it doesn't have to be. this is the best "way" I can explain 1-1-1 diag. movement.

There is no static grid. Every Grid only applies to the current "active" creature/PC. So the Grid that a player moves on is ever "aligning" to always be "facing" with the character's direction.

I like hexes better too though. Always have and always used them...