DracoSuave
First Post
But blasts in 4e don't start thin and end wide... part of their usage is the fact you can blast a bunch of foes adjacent to you. Cone shaped would make things like Thunderwave a -lot- less useful.
That's not a small nerf.
squares vs hexes?
- Thread starter invokethehojo
- Start date
But blasts in 4e don't start thin and end wide... part of their usage is the fact you can blast a bunch of foes adjacent to you. Cone shaped would make things like Thunderwave a -lot- less useful.
That's not a small nerf.
Shin Okada
Explorer
Hexes work slightly better to represent a wide-flat battlefield. But if you start to think about altitude and vertical movement, you will find that hexes do not help much.
I prefer to use hexes when playing a game mainly handling ground-based combat (or large-scale battle). But prefer to use squares when playing D&D. Because it is far much easier.
I prefer to use hexes when playing a game mainly handling ground-based combat (or large-scale battle). But prefer to use squares when playing D&D. Because it is far much easier.
tiornys
Explorer
Odd blasts are easy: figure the complementary burst (i.e. blast 3 = burst 1, blast 5 = burst 2, etc.), and put that shape adjacent to your hex. Even blasts are trickier. They're probably best represented by the same pseudo-triangles that were proposed above regarding creature size increases.
t~
t~
shadowoflameth
Adventurer
I've been using hexes in D&D through 3.0-3.5 and on into 4th for a total of over 10 years now.
Make coridors and such any shape you like. If somthing doesn't match the bee people shape, rule that a square partly occupied by a wall or whatever is crowded.
Havent had a complaint yet. (at least not about that).
Robert the DM
Make coridors and such any shape you like. If somthing doesn't match the bee people shape, rule that a square partly occupied by a wall or whatever is crowded.
Havent had a complaint yet. (at least not about that).
Robert the DM
Nifft
Penguin Herder
Why not? Odd elevations appear over hex vertices, even elevations appear over hex centers.
"Descending" or "Ascending" can be counted as moving from vertex to center, so effectively cuts horizontal movement in half.
Cheers, -- N
Nytmare
David Jose
It makes more sense to have bursts and blasts follow the "expanding hex" route, doesn't it?
Yikes, I had never actually thought about the headaches that a 3-dimensional hex grid brought to the table...
You could do it like Nifft was saying, and treat each level as an offset grid. It would be fine for counting out movement, but would probably leave visualizing where things were in the gird to be a bit of a head scratcher for most people. It would help to have people try to imagine it as a nested stack of spheres, but I still can't imagine most of the groups I play with being able to handle this bit of mental gymnastics.
The "normal" answer to this that I usually see is to just keep each level of the grid the same as the one below it; but depending on what your reasons are for wanting to switch over to hexes, all this does is reintroduce the same problems you might already have with a square grid.
Burst: pick a hex and count outward by the burst number.
Blast: an area describe by a row of hexes equal to the blast number.
Blast: an area describe by a row of hexes equal to the blast number.
Shin Okada said:
Yikes, I had never actually thought about the headaches that a 3-dimensional hex grid brought to the table...
You could do it like Nifft was saying, and treat each level as an offset grid. It would be fine for counting out movement, but would probably leave visualizing where things were in the gird to be a bit of a head scratcher for most people. It would help to have people try to imagine it as a nested stack of spheres, but I still can't imagine most of the groups I play with being able to handle this bit of mental gymnastics.
The "normal" answer to this that I usually see is to just keep each level of the grid the same as the one below it; but depending on what your reasons are for wanting to switch over to hexes, all this does is reintroduce the same problems you might already have with a square grid.
Zinovia
Explorer
I'm a fan of hexes and we've been using them in a variety of games, including both 3.5 and 4E D&D. Don't worry about crossing the grid lines and you can draw anything you want. I sometimes use a ruler and just draw the walls to whatever size I need. Square grids have exactly the same problem when dealing with round rooms or building dimensions that are not an even multiple of 5 feet.
When it comes to spell areas, it is true that the number of hexes affected by a burst spell is fewer than the number of squares it would affect on a square grid. The number of enemies that can surround you is likewise smaller. None of my players has found this to be a problem, but then again, they have only played 4E on a hex grid, so they don't know any better.
I personally prefer the more rounded shape (hexagonal really) of the spells, because firecubes just seem wrong. Blast spells translate into cones, and do cover the same number of hexes as they would on a square grid. In order to help figure out what area spells will hit, I made a bunch of hex grid templates. There's a link to the post in my sig, but here's one of them.
.
In the PDF I spent a bit of time talking about why I made the shapes the way I did, and the issues of the number of hexes in burst spells.
I don't have a problem with larger creatures. I just put them on the grid and see which hexes their bases cover. If a given hex is more than half covered, then the creature is occupying that hex. I don't need to change the round base into some other shape to make it work. When it comes to determining flanking against large creatures, we just eyeball it. Are those hexes on opposite sides of the creature in a straight line? Then yeah, it's a flank.
I'm sure part of our group's preference is that it's what we are used to, and we have a nice hex mat from Chessex that covers the dining room table. It's not one of the two-sided ones, so I'd need a new mat to go with squares. I honestly don't see any real benefit to squares however. The math thing would bug me a bit, because you can't just eyeball distances anymore. Diagonals are shorter (in squares) than they are in actual distance (with a ruler). If I have a square grid battle mat for something, I may go ahead and use it, squares and all, if I feel it's conveying the right feel for that area. If it's just a bunch of rocks and bushes, I'll draw in the relevant terrain on the hex mat and use paper props.
All grid systems are an artificial constraint on how things move in relation to each other. Either system works, but both have flaws. Hexes are nice for determining flanking, counting movement without worrying about the square root of 2, and making spells more round and less boxy. Your character is not closer to someone who is 8 inches away from him diagonally than he is to someone who is 8 inches away from him in a straight line (measuring with a ruler). Sure, he may walk with a bit of a side to side waddle, but it's better than playing hopscotch by jumping into squares and throwing firecubes.
When it comes to spell areas, it is true that the number of hexes affected by a burst spell is fewer than the number of squares it would affect on a square grid. The number of enemies that can surround you is likewise smaller. None of my players has found this to be a problem, but then again, they have only played 4E on a hex grid, so they don't know any better.
I personally prefer the more rounded shape (hexagonal really) of the spells, because firecubes just seem wrong. Blast spells translate into cones, and do cover the same number of hexes as they would on a square grid. In order to help figure out what area spells will hit, I made a bunch of hex grid templates. There's a link to the post in my sig, but here's one of them.
In the PDF I spent a bit of time talking about why I made the shapes the way I did, and the issues of the number of hexes in burst spells.
I don't have a problem with larger creatures. I just put them on the grid and see which hexes their bases cover. If a given hex is more than half covered, then the creature is occupying that hex. I don't need to change the round base into some other shape to make it work. When it comes to determining flanking against large creatures, we just eyeball it. Are those hexes on opposite sides of the creature in a straight line? Then yeah, it's a flank.
I'm sure part of our group's preference is that it's what we are used to, and we have a nice hex mat from Chessex that covers the dining room table. It's not one of the two-sided ones, so I'd need a new mat to go with squares. I honestly don't see any real benefit to squares however. The math thing would bug me a bit, because you can't just eyeball distances anymore. Diagonals are shorter (in squares) than they are in actual distance (with a ruler). If I have a square grid battle mat for something, I may go ahead and use it, squares and all, if I feel it's conveying the right feel for that area. If it's just a bunch of rocks and bushes, I'll draw in the relevant terrain on the hex mat and use paper props.
All grid systems are an artificial constraint on how things move in relation to each other. Either system works, but both have flaws. Hexes are nice for determining flanking, counting movement without worrying about the square root of 2, and making spells more round and less boxy. Your character is not closer to someone who is 8 inches away from him diagonally than he is to someone who is 8 inches away from him in a straight line (measuring with a ruler). Sure, he may walk with a bit of a side to side waddle, but it's better than playing hopscotch by jumping into squares and throwing firecubes.
DracoSuave
First Post
n^2 != (n^2 + n) / 2 unless n = 0
Actually, if you don't like approximation, just get rid of the grid entirely, pull out this:
like the wargamers do.
Then you have none of the disadvantages of hex OR squares.
Last edited:
Nifft
Penguin Herder
... or when n = 1, obviously.
-- N
PS: For blasts, I rather like the idea of a cone. I suspect that having another attack shape would allow more interesting tactics.
Zinovia
Explorer
My math choices when coming up with the template shapes are explained in the PDF containing them. I decided that a 90 degree arc worked best in multiple directions, but the shapes are approximated on the grid. Generally I counted out the number of hexes that the blast radius specified, and then fanned it out to the sides. The shapes are symmetrical, and do include the same number of hexes that would have been affected by the spell on a square grid. I have two templates for blasts based on whether they are aimed off the side of the hex, or its point.
I do like the different shape of the blast spells, and feel that it's more interesting than if they were the same as the bursts. The players like to line the templates up so they can be as effective as possible. So do the monsters.
Going gridless would be possible, and in that case you can make templates that are whatever shape and dimension you want. Truly round fireballs and cone shaped blasts would be nice. It also avoids the funky shape distortions the hex versions of blasts undergo based on the direction that they are pointed in. I prefer being able to count movement and such without a ruler, so I don't think I'd run without a grid altogether, but it's definitely a viable choice. Hexes work well for our group.
I do like the different shape of the blast spells, and feel that it's more interesting than if they were the same as the bursts. The players like to line the templates up so they can be as effective as possible. So do the monsters.
Going gridless would be possible, and in that case you can make templates that are whatever shape and dimension you want. Truly round fireballs and cone shaped blasts would be nice. It also avoids the funky shape distortions the hex versions of blasts undergo based on the direction that they are pointed in. I prefer being able to count movement and such without a ruler, so I don't think I'd run without a grid altogether, but it's definitely a viable choice. Hexes work well for our group.
Similar Threads
