Jump to content

June 10 Update


Gremdel
 Share

Recommended Posts

Neither - they're equally useless in different ways. That's why within a few months we'll have switched over to unmarked terrain and inch scale with a ruler. It was a hex board when it came to me, and when I refurb'd it I asked if hexes or squares and the unanimous vote was hexes.

 

(It was redone in 2005, but looks way older because I used poor tape and paper. That's why comic collectors are so picky about material for storage, right there. Acid.)

Dude! You're old! (Yeah, my favorite way of running combats, too....)

I'm thinking he's going to be an ancient statue built by a long dead civilization... lol.. seriously though.. why would you even fight something that big..

Because you're Ghostbusters! That's why!

 

250px-Spawn_of_Cathulhu_Demons.jpg

 

I am running a pair of GBI games - one for the parents, the other for the next generation*. The grown-up game takes place in the 1990s - the one for the kids is set today. And they take place in the same universe - so the kids can talk to their parents, who's characters have sometimes played a scenario against the same opponent, twenty years ago....

 

It happened because after asking me to run a game for their kids the parents decided that they wanted to play too... there were seven players in the game....

 

The Auld Grump

 

*Two of the kids are third generation gamers! Their parents and grandparents have both played RPGs....

Edited by TheAuldGrump
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 253
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I've always used squares, but only because I don't have a hex grid to use. If I ever stop being lazy about getting a hex grid, I'd be using it in an instant because of diagonals being better represented and the fact that diagonal movement and combat seems to happen quite often in my games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We used squares based maps for interiors, towns, and cities, while hexes were for wilderness and crosscountry maps.

 

Ah, an old-school man.

 

I always wondered if the transition from square to hexagonal grids as you transition from inside to out had to do with the flow of Aether through a magical structure. It aligns at either 60 or 90 degree angles, as dictated by environment. ::D:

 

@TheAuldGrump: I ran a short campaign using the GBI rules from West End Games for my friends a few years back - I love that system. I just wish my Ghost die was in better shape; the ghost symbol has nearly rubbed off with age, ::(:

Edited by klarg1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've found that Hexes work best when you're dealing with vehicles with single-axis movement [forward/backward] and a non-zero turning radius...planes, cars, ships, etc...though the inability to move on a perpendicular axis relative to the map without doing the 'battlemech shuffle' gets annoying, especially in games where you pay per facing change.

 

Squares are great for cardinal axes [and buildings, since buildings tend to have a lot of right angles]...but are awful for diagonals, since either you end up with ugly math or the ability to abuse diagonals to cover more ground than you could otherwise [taking advantage of sqrt(2) > 1 or sqrt(3) > 1 to move faster].

 

Octagons are effectively funny-looking squares that don't tessellate cleanly, and have all the same properties.

 

Staring at a field of triangles hurts the brain, and they're even less mathematically sound than squares...~6 units center-edge-center, ~10 units center-point-center.

 

I'll play with it more when I get home, but from a 'top of my head' standpoint the only way to get precise distance and 8-directional movement is to go gridless. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back before third edition D&D, we just got out the pythagorean theorem to calculate triangular movement on a square grid, the problem was that it was hard to move in anything but a straight line. As wonky as the new diagonal move rules are, they are fast and good enough for our purposes. You could use a string to measure movement in gridless setup, but then the string would get tangled in the minis and chaos would ensue. (Can you guess that we do a lot of zig-zagging?)

 

I'm grateful for the grid concept in a way, it and a friend are what got me started painting miniatures. ^_^

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back before third edition D&D, we just got out the pythagorean theorem to calculate triangular movement on a square grid, the problem was that it was hard to move in anything but a straight line. As wonky as the new diagonal move rules are, they are fast and good enough for our purposes. You could use a string to measure movement in gridless setup, but then the string would get tangled in the minis and chaos would ensue. (Can you guess that we do a lot of zig-zagging?)

 

I'm grateful for the grid concept in a way, it and a friend are what got me started painting miniatures. ^_^

 

Before 3rd-ed, we didn't use a grid for anything but tactical wargaming; it was all "DM...am I close enough to...?" through a shared mental image of the situation. My group's gotten imaginatively lazy since grids and minis came into play. Doesn't stop me from buying them by the truckload, though.

 

Wonky diagonals aside, DnD 3 is about as good as you can get for striking the balance of 'accurate vs annoying' on a square grid; 4th did '1 point no matter what direction you moved in', which is extremely convenient...but wreaks havoc on using any scale of measurement other than 'squares'.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Back before third edition D&D, we just got out the pythagorean theorem to calculate triangular movement on a square grid, the problem was that it was hard to move in anything but a straight line. As wonky as the new diagonal move rules are, they are fast and good enough for our purposes. You could use a string to measure movement in gridless setup, but then the string would get tangled in the minis and chaos would ensue. (Can you guess that we do a lot of zig-zagging?)

 

I'm grateful for the grid concept in a way, it and a friend are what got me started painting miniatures. ^_^

 

Before 3rd-ed, we didn't use a grid for anything but tactical wargaming; it was all "DM...am I close enough to...?" through a shared mental image of the situation. My group's gotten imaginatively lazy since grids and minis came into play. Doesn't stop me from buying them by the truckload, though.

 

Wonky diagonals aside, DnD 3 is about as good as you can get for striking the balance of 'accurate vs annoying' on a square grid; 4th did '1 point no matter what direction you moved in', which is extremely convenient...but wreaks havoc on using any scale of measurement other than 'squares'.

 

 

In the 4th edition Realms, pi is simultaneously equal to both 2 and 4, and woe be to the warrior who is subject to the dreaded "Fire Cube" spell.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

In the 4th edition Realms, pi is simultaneously equal to both 2 and 4, and woe be to the warrior who is subject to the dreaded "Fire Cube" spell.

 

 

And now I'm sitting here giggling like an idiot, picturing a monk/sorceror dressed in a white gi and red handband putting his hands together heel-to-heel, palms out, and shouting "HADODECAHEDRON!"

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trick to nonlinear measured movement is to get something like florist's wire, and cut it to movement length (so 12" for man-sized, 6 for halflings/gobbers, etc). This is easily bent to accomodate any curve, and easily straightened thereafter without the weakness of something like lead-free solder wire. Facing rules aren't an issue, because most of the time even with a square or hex it's imprecise unless you've based everything precisely (and I don't base minis).

 

Combat in RPGs is an abstract anyway, so movement and facing are only handy guidelines rather than strict applications. I.E. if 2 kobolds can fit in a "square" (unit of facing) and you have 6 kobolds arrayed arround your frontal zone, then 2 are from front, and 2 from each flank. Nitpicking or trying to fudge based on pose is efficiently dealt with via liberal distribution of Pit Fiend arbiters to beat the offending player until they agree.

 

They're harsh but fair.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...