Preferred scale for hexcrawling?

[Orius]

This is where I say "You know what's free and awesome? Hexographer is free and awesome."

Hexographer Hex Map Software: Home

I know about Hexographer. Not a bad program, but I often like to map things by hand. Most map software I've played with, including Hexographer, always has some limitation or other. Hexographer does show some promise for making player maps.

 

[InkwellIdeas]

Thanks for the mention PirateCat!

I know about Hexographer. Not a bad program, but I often like to map things by hand. Most map software I've played with, including Hexographer, always has some limitation or other. Hexographer does show some promise for making player maps.

Yep, any map software will have limitations of one sort or another to one degree or another. But I did want to point out that a couple of months ago I added a feature to Hexographer that lets you designate features (ruins, dungeons, caves in particular, but cities, castles, mines, etc. as well) and lines and text as "GM only." Then you can turn these on or off using a checkbox menu item on the "Show/Hide" menu. So it is now more useful for having one map file that can be saved and printed in GM or players versions.

Also, I'm working on overcoming one of the frequent limitations of hex maps: the idea that features (such as ruins, cities, castles, etc.) and hexes have a one-to-one relationship. There will soon (I expect 2-4 weeks out--I tend to put out many small monthly/bimonthly releases instead of less frequent/larger releases) be a way to add a feature at a specific point on the map and even scale it down so you can fit multiple features nearby. Currently in Hexographer this isn't possible unless you use the simple symbol features (which are just a square, or a circle with a ring around it, a star, etc.)

But I realize that Hexographer and definitely hex maps in general may still not be a good fit for one's needs or stylistic preferences. As mentioned above, every map software has limitations of one sort or another.

 

[Orius]

My biggest problem with computer based maps is that I always find it difficult to draw freeform lines (like rivers, coastlines, etc). properly. And I just like making maps on paper.

City maps are also really frustrating too, I've never found software that I could use well for them. Probably because cities follow all kinds of weird angles, and buildings really need to have a sort of semi-unique and/or organic look or something to them that's really hard to do with the pre-set graphics of mapping software.

 

[Ariosto]

I use a "big map" of 1 hex = 60 miles, a "local map" of 1 hex = 10 miles, and a "focus map" of 1 hex = 1 mile. These maps are done using "nested hexes" paper

I prefer my larger hexes to be odd numbers of smaller hexes across, so that there is a central hex. That's somehow more comfortable to me -- maybe a legacy of playing The Fantasy Trip.

Five miles per hex was the OD&D standard, and Judges Guild "nested" five hexes per mile (so 25 across) inside that, IIRC. The first-edition DMG recommends 20 to 40 miles per hex for world maps, with smaller hexes either five across the middle or (larger) five across each face. The folio World of Greyhawk maps are 10 leagues ("approximately 30 miles") across, but travel rates in the Gazetteer are in five-mile increments.

I'm not sure offhand what scales the D&D Gazetteer ("Known World") series used. I vaguely recall their being multiples of 3 miles per hex, in line with the old D&D scheme of movement rates (3", 6", 9", 12", etc.).

 

[Orius]

Five miles per hex was the OD&D standard, and Judges Guild "nested" five hexes per mile (so 25 across) inside that, IIRC.

Interesting. I went with scaling the maps by powers of 5 since it meshed fairly well with the map blanks I have and because it scales things fairly effectively. I was unaware that 1 hex = 5 mi was the old school standard.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

BECMI gazetteers used 8 miles per hex for the national-level maps.

Wider regional maps used 24 miles-per-hex (8 x 3) and 72 miles-per-hex (24 x 3). It's fairly trivial to divide a hex into 7 smaller hexes--three hexes across from edge to edge. IMO, this makes it easy to take a 72 miles-per-hex continental map and add detail at the 24 miles-per-hex level, and again take the 24 miles-per-hex map and add detail at the 8 miles per hex detail.