Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Conaill" data-source="post: 1664600" data-attributes="member: 1264">As I mentioned, I feel it's acceptable to fudge the grid somewhat to keep it aligned. You can either scale the grid slightly, so the squares are a few % smaller or larger, or just draw the squares along the walls a little smaller or larger. Let's say you have a 17' wide room. You could either scale the grid for that room to be about 5 2/3', or have 5' squares in the middle and 6'x5' &quot;squares&quot; along the walls, or even two 5' squares in the middle and 3.5'x5' &quot;squares&quot; along the walls. You should *not* just slavishly stick to a 5' grid and have a 2' strip of partial squares along one wall - or even worse: two 1' strips along both walls!Partial squares are not really a problem, as long as they either unambiguously count as &quot;full&quot; squares or as inaccessible ones. In the example above, a strip of 3.5'x5' &quot;squares&quot; along the walls is fairly unambiguous. A 1' or 2' strip is *not*, and in case of the 1' strip you might as well erase a grid line and make the next squares just a little larger. Along the same lines, if you do wind up having to fit diagonal walls, you can typically arrange the grid such that you get either almost complete squares, or small triangles that nobody will mistake for a real square (and you can often get rid of those too by joining them to adjacent squares).Yes, all of this takes quite a bit more effort than just slapping an arbitrary grid over the whole thing. You may wind up having to edit individual grid spacings and grid lines, and you'll have to &quot;marry&quot; differently aligned grids across doorways etc. But I'm guessing more than half of that effort could be avoided by keeping an eye on the dimensions from the get-go.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Conaill, post: 1664600, member: 1264"] As I mentioned, I feel it's acceptable to fudge the grid somewhat to keep it aligned. You can either scale the grid slightly, so the squares are a few % smaller or larger, or just draw the squares along the walls a little smaller or larger. Let's say you have a 17' wide room. You could either scale the grid for that room to be about 5 2/3', or have 5' squares in the middle and 6'x5' "squares" along the walls, or even two 5' squares in the middle and 3.5'x5' "squares" along the walls. You should *not* just slavishly stick to a 5' grid and have a 2' strip of partial squares along one wall - or even worse: two 1' strips along both walls! Partial squares are not really a problem, as long as they either unambiguously count as "full" squares or as inaccessible ones. In the example above, a strip of 3.5'x5' "squares" along the walls is fairly unambiguous. A 1' or 2' strip is *not*, and in case of the 1' strip you might as well erase a grid line and make the next squares just a little larger. Along the same lines, if you do wind up having to fit diagonal walls, you can typically arrange the grid such that you get either almost complete squares, or small triangles that nobody will mistake for a real square (and you can often get rid of those too by joining them to adjacent squares). Yes, all of this takes quite a bit more effort than just slapping an arbitrary grid over the whole thing. You may wind up having to edit individual grid spacings and grid lines, and you'll have to "marry" differently aligned grids across doorways etc. But I'm guessing more than half of that effort could be avoided by keeping an eye on the dimensions from the get-go. [/QUOTE]

Verification