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

[Ratskinner]

That said, my mostly proud OSR group seems stuck on 3.5-like square grids.

For me square grids is OSR. I met them the first time I played (AD&D1).

2cm (or was it 2.5cm? can't recall) grid paper mounted on a board with a plastic cover, drawn with water soluble OH pens.
Basically the same as I use today.

I never did grids until 3.0. My AD&D groups all did ToTM or analog measurement for combat. Hexes were for overland maps, and grids were something the DM and maybe the party mapper saw. Of course, we might not have been as dungeons as other groups.

 

[aramis erak]

Yes, but not the grid.

Why would you make a grid using weird foreign measurements? Nevermind where you'd buy one.

Our DM, Oldtimer, might have made it in inches, but considering how hard it was (is) to find rulers with inches I don't see why.

Because 25mm minis on 20-25mm bases is a wargaming standard worldwide, and 2.5cm grids allow them to fit nicely "in the box" of the grid.

And in metric lands, which by the way lack convenient measures for body parts, thus making mental integration somewhat harder, it's not that hard to take a ruler and a chunk of string or a dowel, and mark off every 2.5cm. Or to take and mark every 2.5cm with a paint dot on the ruler itself.

Can't remember anything about recommended grid measurements in OD&D, which was what he played when he made the grid. (He had started using a heavily houseruled AD&D when I came along.)

1"=10' was the standard for the "underworld", and 1"=10yd on the surface, derived from chainmail's 1"=10yd and 1:20 figure scale. (D&D [OE] Vol 3, p 8; Chainmail, 3rd ed, p 8.).

Many players, however, set up dungeons at 1"=5' because it was a better fit for 25mm figures' height to ground scale, and also about right for 25mm figures to 28mm figures; its just about dead on perfect for 30mm.

 

[KarinsDad]

Many players, however, set up dungeons at 1"=5' because it was a better fit for 25mm figures' height to ground scale, and also about right for 25mm figures to 28mm figures; its just about dead on perfect for 30mm.

I remember decades ago setting up 1 hex = 1 meter, 3 hexes = 10 feet. It helped so much in smaller rooms, allowing the PCs to actually navigate in a smaller area.

 

[Henrix]

Minifigs fit nicely on a 2cm grid I can tell you

28mm? 30mm? What minis were those? None that we had at the time.

I think you are missing the point - whyever would we stick to inch grids when inches just was a weird foreign measurement?

We normally translated all distances into something we could relate to. I had a cheat sheet with all weird units and what they really meant.


(And my feet are not a foot long, by the way )

 

[Skyscraper]

It's the reason some cities have a cartesian urbanism setup: it's straightforward and easy to figure out (though it might weel be ugly urbanism, mind you). In other words, it's simpler.

And really, the game has a much higher scale of abstraction than the difference in spacial accuracy between hexes and squares. I.e. players need to digest abstraction concepts such as hit points, armor class representing armor and dodging capacity, all creatures of a given race moving at exactly the same base speed, and generally creatures doing things undoable in the real world, just to name a few. So when one asks me if hexes represent the game with more spatial accuracy than squares, I'm like: dude, you're right, but this is pretty far down the list of abstractions that my mind needs to accept to imagine the alternate reality in game terms, so simplicity overrides the spacial accuracy hands down.

 

[Mercule]

Humans have a tendency to build things with right angles. Those are better represented with squares than hexes. Thus, I use squares indoors. Since indoors makes up 80%+ of the occasion I need for a battle mat, I see using hexes for other settings as an unnecessary complication to the flow of play.

Personally, I don't even see much use to hex mats for most RPG use cases. If you're working with a situation that at least vaguely resembles two lines moving towards one another, then hexes make some sense. As soon as you throw in any significant lateral movement, though, hexes start to become problematic. In fact, I'd say that hexes break down much quicker and more significantly for lateral movement than squares do for diagonal movement. Moving diagonal on a grid at least gives you a space there, whether or not you have problems with euclidean space. If you want to move laterally on a grid, there's literally nothing there. Clearly, YMMV, and there are a number of folks that love hexes. I'm not among them.

I have considered, though, doing a gridless mat. That solves the problems of both squares and hexes. It brings a few of its own though, including questions of just how much space you take up, when you provide cover, and having to use a ruler to check reach all the time. I'd like to try it, but I'm not sure what I'd be getting into.

 

[KarinsDad]

I have considered, though, doing a gridless mat. That solves the problems of both squares and hexes. It brings a few of its own though, including questions of just how much space you take up, when you provide cover, and having to use a ruler to check reach all the time. I'd like to try it, but I'm not sure what I'd be getting into.

Some people swear by it. Some people swear at it.

We tried it for the LMoP game. We ran into problems with deciding whether a creature was adjacent or not, if a miniature go knocked over, where was he?, exactly how far can I move?, etc.

 

[Ruzak]

For me the maps generated with the assumption of a five or ten foot grid look inherently"D&D" to me. You can tell at a glace a particular floorplan belongs in the game. What you lose in realistic building design you make up for in unique style.

 

[aramis erak]

Minifigs fit nicely on a 2cm grid I can tell you

28mm? 30mm? What minis were those? None that we had at the time.

I think you are missing the point - whyever would we stick to inch grids when inches just was a weird foreign measurement?

We normally translated all distances into something we could relate to. I had a cheat sheet with all weird units and what they really meant.


(And my feet are not a foot long, by the way )

30's are mentioned in chainmail, so your lack of awareness is a personal matter. 28's are the current defacto standard.

And the 1" grid is an international standard. The Metric "Inch" (used in several countries" is exactly 2.5 cm, and the metric "foot" is 30cm exactly... it's made in large sheet formats in the US, and has been for years.
Likewise, Con-Tac brand has used 1" grids and 1/2" grids for 40+ years...

And lots of sewing grids are in 2.5cm (because it makes using old pattern books easier).
And it's interesting to note that Warhammer, written in Britain, used inches as its default measure for the tabletop... and still does.

You may not like the standard, you may not understand the concept of standards, but it's a standard, and has been for 100+ years of minis wargaming, to use the inch as a measure on the table. (Blame HG Wells.)

 

[Henrix]

And the 1" grid is an international standard.

Jeebus, man, it's interesting to see that this point interests you so much, and your knowledge of how inches and standards are used in countries where they are not, and have not for well over a hundred years.

I actually tried getting paper with inch squares back in the day, but could not find any. Suppose I was wrong, then, and could have gotten it easily. (And whatever is a Con-Tac brand thing? Nothing I've ever heard of.)

I can't really see what you are after.
Trying to make me understand that we must have used your preferred measures 35 years ago, despite it being seen as weird and quaint (which it still is, except in the US, Liberia and Burma. And, well, UK)?
That we were wrong if we did not?

Please continue your discussion without me.