Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Geron Raveneye" data-source="post: 4056150" data-attributes="member: 2268">Sorry, I fear we're not going to come to terms on this one either. See, for me the combat area of a Huge creature is 15'x15', which is how I get it from the DMG. NOT 3x3 squares. It IS 3x3 squares when you align the border of the field (or a square mini base sized correctly) with the grid of a battlemap. When you align it diagonally to the battlemap, the size of the field (15'x15') doesn't change. The number of squares you use to represent that changes to 2 diagonals, according to the 1-2-1-2 rules. Neither the mini, nor the battlemap change size.It does make me wonder what's so hard about this to understand? Do I need to create and post pictures of physical models to get this across? Or is the disconnect where 3.X doesn't use squares as primary unit of measurement, but feet? And that the thing that changes according to angle on the battlemap is NOT the size of either monster (mini) nor the room, but the number of square equivalents used to measure it? Somehow I feel like there's a deeper disconnect here than I thought.And to answer your last question...a 15'x15' field for a creature is drawn as a 3-inch-square, since the standard scale for D&amp;D uses 1 inch as 5 feet, if my memory isn't faulty. For a 30'x30' size, you use 6 inches of course. Easy, isn't it? And as far as I know, inches can be found on every (US) standard ruler, right? Shouldn't be much of a problem. Otherwise, I can simply use cm instead. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Geron Raveneye, post: 4056150, member: 2268"] Sorry, I fear we're not going to come to terms on this one either. See, for me the combat area of a Huge creature is 15'x15', which is how I get it from the DMG. NOT 3x3 squares. It IS 3x3 squares when you align the border of the field (or a square mini base sized correctly) with the grid of a battlemap. When you align it diagonally to the battlemap, the size of the field (15'x15') doesn't change. The number of squares you use to represent that changes to 2 diagonals, according to the 1-2-1-2 rules. Neither the mini, nor the battlemap change size. It does make me wonder what's so hard about this to understand? Do I need to create and post pictures of physical models to get this across? Or is the disconnect where 3.X doesn't use squares as primary unit of measurement, but feet? And that the thing that changes according to angle on the battlemap is NOT the size of either monster (mini) nor the room, but the number of square equivalents used to measure it? Somehow I feel like there's a deeper disconnect here than I thought. And to answer your last question...a 15'x15' field for a creature is drawn as a 3-inch-square, since the standard scale for D&D uses 1 inch as 5 feet, if my memory isn't faulty. For a 30'x30' size, you use 6 inches of course. Easy, isn't it? And as far as I know, inches can be found on every (US) standard ruler, right? Shouldn't be much of a problem. Otherwise, I can simply use cm instead. :lol: [/QUOTE]

Verification