Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Eliza_Stormwhisper 04-20-05, 09:11 PM	I'm just curious which system you use for battles. I'll describe the three basic ones, and what I like and don't like about each. Square grid - The standard of 3.5 and 3.0. I think it's the simplest one to use, but the most restrictive. Hex grid - The standard of 1.0 and 2.0. It strikes a balance between simplicity and restrictiveness. Free-form - I prefer to use this one. You just place your markers (or miniatures) on the tabletop, with no grid of any kind, and measure distances with a ruler. It's the hardest to use, but pretty simple by its own right.
Cog 04-21-05, 12:13 AM	If we use a battle map, we use a square grid one. Most of the time, we let the battle unfold in our own minds. :)
Mumakil 04-21-05, 01:22 AM	For small encounters, our DM will use graph paper BEHIND the DM screen to keep track of positioning, and describe the action in a story-like narrative without the players ever seeing the map. This actually works really well for our group because we are all fairly good at keeping a mental image of what is going on. For larger climactic battles, we will pull out the square-grid battlemat and miniatures.
weasel fierce 04-21-05, 01:39 AM	Normally we just do it in our heads, or with some scrap paper and a rough outline. AD&D combat is too abstract for miniatures to be usefull, I find. If we do use toys on the table, I prefer using inches and measurements, since Im used to that from wargames
allenchan 04-21-05, 01:58 AM	Normally we just do it in our heads, or with some scrap paper and a rough outline. AD&D combat is too abstract for miniatures to be usefull, I find. Yea, thats why I play 3.5 not AD&D. I use square grids and minis (or dice as substitutes).
SneakyPetey 04-21-05, 09:55 AM	I create all my maps on a square grid. When we're "in session," I use a whiteboard to represent character and enemy locations. We play 2nd Ed., and have never been into using miniatures. The only drawback is when a question of distance comes up, I have to refer back to the paper map. It's not the most efficient way of doing things, but I don't agree with showing the players how everything is laid out on a grid. I don't know too many people who can look at a scene and say, "Target A is precisely 33 feet away, and Target B is 57 feet away." My characters ask, and I say "It looks to your character like Target A is at least 30 feet away, and Target B is around 60 feet away." I think this makes things more realistic. I like the added uncertainty of this system too. If someone has a spell with a range of 100', and the DM says, "The target is at least 100 feet away," a wise player would find another spell to use or another target to cast the spell at, lest the target turns out to be out of range...
weasel fierce 04-21-05, 02:01 PM	I find the main drawback of miniatures is that they make the game into a tactical exercise, where everyone knows exactly what is going on, everywhere. Not desirable in most cases
Sarella Starshine 04-21-05, 05:50 PM	i use the square grid and mini's because its just easier to visuallize exactly how fights are laid out, where the attacks are coming from, etc. its hard planning sneaky fights if you don't know where everyone is positioned and how far they are from each other
Ranger REG 04-21-05, 06:09 PM	I'm just curious which system you use for battles. I'll describe the three basic ones, and what I like and don't like about each. Square grid - The standard of 3.5 and 3.0. I think it's the simplest one to use, but the most restrictive. Meh. You have eight directions to travel. Rules give leeway regarding "charging in a straight line." You can be surrounded by eight enemies of your size. Hex grid - The standard of 1.0 and 2.0. It strikes a balance between simplicity and restrictiveness. Only outdoors maps. Indoors maps stick to grids. Other non-D&D games tried to apply hex on indoors environment like buildings and dungeons ... but they look too friggin WEIRD! :eek: Free-form - I prefer to use this one. You just place your markers (or miniatures) on the tabletop, with no grid of any kind, and measure distances with a ruler. It's the hardest to use, but pretty simple by its own right. Also known as circular grid. You have 360 directions to travel (by degrees, not counting seconds). Not truly hard, but resolving movement takes time.
IceFractal 04-22-05, 03:10 AM	I like the square grid generally. A hex grid may be more accurate sometimes, but it makes it hard to do any kind of structures with straight walls. For minor fights I'll just put the pieces down on the table and measure distances by eye approximately. For more major ones involving lots of people or complex tactics, I'll use a grid. It's a lot simpler to keep track of things, you get less arguments about positioning, and while the PCs might not really be able to tell 100' from 105', they certainly can tell how to flank, guard the passageway, stay out of line of sight, and similar stuff, which is a lot easier when you've got a grid to work with.
Nytmare 04-22-05, 11:30 AM	I've often wondered how hex map players handle sizes of larger than medium sized creatures? Do you just expand, keeping a roughly hexagonal shape for each size increase, or do you expand along a triangular shape?
Ranger REG 04-23-05, 07:08 AM	I've often wondered how hex map players handle sizes of larger than medium sized creatures? Do you just expand, keeping a roughly hexagonal shape for each size increase, or do you expand along a triangular shape? The new Unearthed Arcana have some helpful suggestions (with pictures) when using hex.