Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
battlemat: square grid vs. hex grid
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 1766878" data-attributes="member: 3146"><p>Cone effects are defined as a 90 degree arc now--something that would be just as problematic for a hex grid to resolve as for a square grid.</p><p></p><p>Lines wouldn't be much easier to resolve on a hex grid than on a square grid. Granted, there would be six nonproblematic paths instead of four but there would be just as many problematic paths and some of those problematic paths would look even wierder. A straight path from the apex of the hex, for instance would cover a 1 hex/2 hexes/1 hex/2 hexes pattern</p><p></p><p>Flanking is not much of a problem when confined to medium creatures but flanking large creatures or flanking with reach weapons is at least as problematic as it is on square grids--perhaps more problematic because the application of the "2 opposite sides" rule to determine flanking is less obvious with a hex grid. (Or maybe it's just far more restrictive).</p><p></p><p>Burst and spread effects would be <em>more</em> representatively shaped, however, there would still be a number of oddities when all of your supposedly circular bursts turned out to be hex shaped. It's closer than squares or the odd cross and block formations that are default for square grids but it's still not perfect.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I've always hated how hex grids don't allow movement in a straight line on both the X and Y axis. They handle diagonal movement better than square grids but, given a hex with the point at the front, it's impossible to <strong>just</strong> move forward. You have to move forward and right or forward and left in order to move forward.</p><p></p><p>I don't much like the three hex solution for large creatures either--at least not with miniatures. The mini inevitably covers up large portions of nearby hexes too and it is often confusing <strong>exactly</strong> which three hexes a creature is in.</p><p></p><p>If I have to choose, I stick with a square grid though using hexes outdoors and squares indoors would be workable way to handle things. I think, however, that eschewing the grid alltogether would probably be the best way to handle things. Use templates for spell effects and rulers for movement. You would need to use consistently sized and shaped miniature bases for it to work properly (if one guy is using a 20mm hex base and someone else has a 25mm square base, templates, etc will treat them differently). However, I think it would be worth it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Elder-Basilisk, post: 1766878, member: 3146"] Cone effects are defined as a 90 degree arc now--something that would be just as problematic for a hex grid to resolve as for a square grid. Lines wouldn't be much easier to resolve on a hex grid than on a square grid. Granted, there would be six nonproblematic paths instead of four but there would be just as many problematic paths and some of those problematic paths would look even wierder. A straight path from the apex of the hex, for instance would cover a 1 hex/2 hexes/1 hex/2 hexes pattern Flanking is not much of a problem when confined to medium creatures but flanking large creatures or flanking with reach weapons is at least as problematic as it is on square grids--perhaps more problematic because the application of the "2 opposite sides" rule to determine flanking is less obvious with a hex grid. (Or maybe it's just far more restrictive). Burst and spread effects would be [i]more[/i] representatively shaped, however, there would still be a number of oddities when all of your supposedly circular bursts turned out to be hex shaped. It's closer than squares or the odd cross and block formations that are default for square grids but it's still not perfect. Personally, I've always hated how hex grids don't allow movement in a straight line on both the X and Y axis. They handle diagonal movement better than square grids but, given a hex with the point at the front, it's impossible to [b]just[/b] move forward. You have to move forward and right or forward and left in order to move forward. I don't much like the three hex solution for large creatures either--at least not with miniatures. The mini inevitably covers up large portions of nearby hexes too and it is often confusing [b]exactly[/b] which three hexes a creature is in. If I have to choose, I stick with a square grid though using hexes outdoors and squares indoors would be workable way to handle things. I think, however, that eschewing the grid alltogether would probably be the best way to handle things. Use templates for spell effects and rulers for movement. You would need to use consistently sized and shaped miniature bases for it to work properly (if one guy is using a 20mm hex base and someone else has a 25mm square base, templates, etc will treat them differently). However, I think it would be worth it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
battlemat: square grid vs. hex grid
Top