I'm the kind of person who'd try it just for a change of pace, but I'm wondering how some other people would react to the idea.
I'm thinking of using some hexagonal maps in the future. Has anyone tried using them before? Is there any real advantage in doing so?
Other than circles looking a bit more circular, and everything looking a bit more natural? No.
I use a hex grid as a DM. The only thing I've changed is the rule of flanking: you don't have to be exactly opposite your ally to flank. I've also made area templates for my players, who were having a bit of trouble wrapping their heads around it. This is how I do it: http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll62/Slateskies/HexExample.jpg
I'm the kind of person who'd try it just for a change of pace, but I'm wondering how some other people would react to the idea.
I've found that some people react irrationally to the hex grid. Certain players don't like it, though they can never come up with any solid reason.
I also use a hex grid battlemap for outdoor encounters. Works great.
On flanking: hexes already make it easier to flank, so further extending flanking isn't at all necessary.
But other then that, there's no major difference.
On flanking: hexes already make it easier to flank, so further extending flanking isn't at all necessary.
Problem is, flanking is impossible in a 1-hex corridor by RAW.
I treat my games the same way. Squares, hexes, etc, are great for showing scale, assisting with distance determination, area of effect, and determining movement limitations. But there is no reason that they should impose restrictions on such things as flanking just because they aren't oriented properly with the hallway. Imo, common sense should always win out over the letter of the law (rule). If characters are technically in flanking positions, regardless of the squares, hexes, etc, I would certainly allow it.
On flanking: hexes already make it easier to flank, so further extending flanking isn't at all necessary.
Problem is, flanking is impossible in a 1-hex corridor by RAW.
False.
On flanking: hexes already make it easier to flank, so further extending flanking isn't at all necessary.
Problem is, flanking is impossible in a 1-hex corridor by RAW.
False.
PHB 285. Not false.
You can't do it the way you have pictured, but if you rotate the hexes 90, it works fine.
Which is great if the dungeon has only parallel corridors, but for all those dungeons (ya know, like 99% of them) with perpendicular corridors it's a problem.
You can't do it the way you have pictured, but if you rotate the hexes 90, it works fine.
Which is great if the dungeon has only parallel corridors, but for all those dungeons (ya know, like 99% of them) with perpendicular corridors it's a problem.
You can have 3 different directions with hex corridors, as apposed to 2 you get with squares.
Walls are easy to do, just apply the rule that you have to be able to occupy at
least half of the square. This probably isn't the best example as it has the varying width hallway, but if you extend it half a hex width-wise, you then have a 4 wide corridor, which will intersect easily with a perpendicular hallway.For blasts, we use the picture to the right, because we prefer the cone effect over the point blank area effect.
Welcome to the hex-club!
On flanking: hexes already make it easier to flank, so further extending flanking isn't at all necessary.
Problem is, flanking is impossible in a 1-hex corridor by RAW.
How do you figure?
On flanking: hexes already make it easier to flank, so further extending flanking isn't at all necessary.
Problem is, flanking is impossible in a 1-hex corridor by RAW.
How do you figure?
Take a look: i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll62/Slatesk...
By RAW, you have to be exactly opposite of your ally to flank.
(How do hexes make flanking easier, btw?)
(How do hexes make flanking easier, btw?)
I, too, wonder about this. For a medium sized creature, you have one pair fewer spots where you can flank. If you start off adjacent to both the medium sized enemy and your ally (on a hex grid) you have to always move 2 squares to flank with that ally. On a square grid, you have to move either 1 or 2 squares.
Take a look: i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll62/Slatesk...
By RAW, you have to be exactly opposite of your ally to flank.
If I am understanding your picture correctly, you have hexes painted on the dungeon floor and the characters have to play hopscotch from the center of one hex to another?
The squares/hexes are designed to be an aid to game mechanics. they are not designed to hinder character options simply because of their orientation. In your picture, if the hexes were oriented with the corridor, the characters could flank their opponent. So let them. There is no obstacle that prevents the characters from positioning themselves 180 degrees apart from each other around the target.
Take a look: i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll62/Slatesk...
By RAW, you have to be exactly opposite of your ally to flank.
If I am understanding your picture correctly, you have hexes painted on the dungeon floor and the characters have to play hopscotch from the center of one hex to another?
The squares/hexes are designed to be an aid to game mechanics. they are not designed to hinder character options simply because of their orientation. In your picture, if the hexes were oriented with the corridor, the characters could flank their opponent. So let them. There is no obstacle that prevents the characters from positioning themselves 180 degrees apart from each other around the target.
I think you're understanding me. I know that hexes/squares are supposed to be game aids, not to be taken literally. I'm just pointing out -- for the benefit of players who might somehow be confused -- that the situation in my image requires a tweak to the RAW. The required tweak is obvious to you and I, but I have seen responses to these hex threads to the effect of "ZOMGbuthowdoIflankinaonehexcorridor?!"
Yes, hex flanking works normally if the corridors are synced nicely with the hexes, but most dungeons have corridors going in at least for directions like this: i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll62/Slatesk...
Essentially, it made battles last... Some small bit longer. I won't even make the claim it was particularly notable except in the one or two battles where I tried to swarm them with smaller monsters.
Yes, hex flanking works normally if the corridors are synced nicely with the hexes, but most dungeons have corridors going in at least for directions like this: i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll62/Slatesk...
If you build your dungeon at right angles, then yes hexes won't work well. If you build them at hex angles, then squares won't work well.
It's a simple concept. Don't use a hex grid in a square dungon.
Yes, hex flanking works normally if the corridors are synced nicely with the hexes, but most dungeons have corridors going in at least for directions like this: i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll62/Slatesk...
If you build your dungeon at right angles, then yes hexes won't work well. If you build them at hex angles, then squares won't work well.
It's a simple concept. Don't use a hex grid in a square dungon.
Gee thanks for telling me I can do that; I never would have thought of it on my own.
Or, use a hex grid + common sense. Also a simple concept.
Also have a Sci-fi thread too guys, if you want to post anythin from Sci-fi to whatever community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
Also have a group for it as well
community.wizards.com/kingsofmetal
does anyone have a genrator for the Hex maps
incompetech.com/graphpaper/hexagonal/
If you build your dungeon at right angles, then yes hexes won't work well. If you build them at hex angles, then squares won't work well.
I also encourage DM's to break the hexes (or squares) for each section of the map. A tunnel that branches off at 90-degrees could still have hexes painted on the floor, they just don't have to align with the room the PCs just left.
Basically, align your grid to your space, not your space to the grid.