Do use "squares"?

[KB9JMQ]

We use a grid and mini's but still move in feet.
Once in a while someone may say squares but we are not moving in that direction.

 

[Henry]

We think of squares and feet synonymously.

Half of us count movement as "1-2-3-4-5-6" and the other half says, "5-10-15-20-25-30." We all almost ALWAYS refer to ranges and areas of effect in terms of feet, however.

 

[Arnwyn]

We use feet exclusively (since, as Henry alluded to in his post above, it's consistent).

 

[Nifft]

Bah! Anti-Hex prejudice!

-- N

 

[Wombat]

Who needs minis?

We have imagination

Also, as I have said before, I got into D&D to get away from miniature gaming!

 

[MerakSpielman]

We don't say "squares." We say the actual distance. "Hey, could somebody move my dude thirty feet closer to the wizard? I can't reach him. No, avoid attacks of opportunity. Yeah, like that. Thanks."


Some people don't like using minis. I think it's because it makes them feel that their game is regressing from a grandiose RPG to a mere tactical wargame. I don't get that feeling during battles with minis. They actually help me visualize what's going on - and they insure that everybody is visualizing the situation the same way.

 

[s/LaSH]

For various reasons of tactical simplicity, I favour squares. Plus, if you want, you can pretend that each square is much bigger and do epic wuxia stuff without a second thought.

 

[Davelozzi]

I voted "It's a concept getting used sometimes now". I have some Dwarven Forge Master Maze stuff and the grid is built in to the floortiles, so we usually default to them there, but otherwise I prefer to have no grid and just eyeball distances, or check with a ruler or string if need be. I'd rather have my players move the characters more like people would move rather than chess pieces. This works fine for us and hasn't caused any arguments yet.

Edit: Regardless of whether or not where using a grid (and counting by squares), we refer to distances in feet, not in squares.

 

[Altalazar]

I have had a square grid map for gaming use for over a decade. The squares have always been used to help calculate or estimate distances between things and to measure out rooms / other things as they are drawn onto it.

I voted "sometimes" - but it is really just a matter of convenience. Where the distance to be measured goes basically along the lines, counting squares is the quick way to go. For diagonals or other weird angles, we estimate - and if it is close, then we actually measure. Most of the time such fine distinctions don't matter that much. And when they do, there's always the issue of how would the CHARACTER know the exact distance to such a degree to be standing in just the right spot, just out of (or in?) range of whatever spell effect (for instance). In those cases, we'd always end up making rolls of some sort if it was close.

Though we DID have the common, semi-joke that when the party was moving it was ALWAYS 22 1/2 feet apart (just for safety) so that no two people could be caught in the 20 foot radius of a fireball...

 

[A'koss]

Originally posted by Henry:
We think of squares and feet synonymously.

Half of us count movement as "1-2-3-4-5-6" and the other half says, "5-10-15-20-25-30." We all almost ALWAYS refer to ranges and areas of effect in terms of feet, however.

Ditto. I will usually call off disances in feet, but I know a couple of players who just like to count the squares.