Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

[Simon]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Um, your opinion of the ridiculousness of this thread is meaningless to me. I have been trying to keep calm while posting, and refrain from insulting people. Even with your removal of your "outburst" I will say I am still not happy with the attitude you have been showing towards me.

 

As far as your "solution", thats all nice and good. I probably will keep my games using hex maps with a 2m:1h scale. But if that was all there was to this topic for me I would have posted so and left it at that.

 

I posted all of those questions because I want to understand why my group has been having issues with scaling, and other groups haven't. I am actually interested in getting actual answers to the questions I put forth (as opposed to your :face palm:). If it can't happen, then it can't happen. But you seem to believe that I am an unreasonable stick-in-the-mud person who can't accept differing opinions or suggestions. Thats just not true.

 

If someone could give me answers I understand better, perhaps I might actually start using a varied scale for combat. Wow, isn't that an interesting prospect. Right now, I am simply having trouble with certain aspects of scaling combat. Sorry, but sometimes people have differing experiences with material and discussing it helps figure out shy

Let's go back to extreme basics, shall we?

 

Forget roleplaying -- mapmaking 101:

 

Maps are scaled representations of "reality". Typically drawn from a "top-down" perspective (as if you were overhead, looking straight down on the subject of the map). Why are they scaled? Because the world is a tad too big to represent conveniently on paper. So you scale it down when you draw it.

 

Now, let's talk for a moment about scale. Does scale matter? Of course it does. Pick too big of a scale, and you'll never be able to view the entire map. Think of a 1-1 scale drawing of a single US city -- it would be the size of that city (obviously). Not terribly useful. Amusing to watch someone try to fold it back up, but not really useful. Likewise, too small of a scale may make the map useless for what you're attempting to do with it. If you're looking to locate someone's house, looking at a map of the U.S.A. won't help you too much.

 

The scale of the map coupled with the precision of the drawing and the precision to which the user is willing to measure distances and plot changes determines the accuracy. People are generally willing/able to track changes on a map within 1/4" or so pretty easily. Much finer than that, and we tend to get lost in the noise of our own errors.

 

For a map which is meant to track a hand to hand combat in a storytelling setting, you're looking to have accuracy on the order of about a foot or so. If you draw the map to the scale of 1" (on the map) equals 2m (in reality), you're pretty close to this limit (1/4" = ~1 1/2 feet).

 

So...there's the origin of 1" = 2m on a map for combat.

 

Now note that at no point have we talked about grid overlays. This is just a map drawn on paper.

 

Grid overlays on maps exist to make gauging distances easier. Instead of hauling out a ruler, I can eyeball the map and see that point A is roughly 1/2 of the way through this grid....and point B is about 1/4 of the way through this other one. Counting the grids between them, I can come up with how many grids there are between point A and point B.

 

Now, if a grid is 1cm and the scale of the map is 1in/1m then this doesn't help me too much. If a grid is 1in, however, this helps me quite a bit in determining the "real world" distance between point A and point B.

 

What shape are the grids? Whatever you like. Any repeating, interlocking pattern works, though regular shapes are best. Typically equilateral triangles, squares, or regular hexagrams....though even a nice houndstooth pattern would technically work out for you.

 

So...we draw our map to scale, overlay a grid to help assist with eyeball measuring, and head into roleplaying.

 

It sounds like you're running into trouble because you're setting the scale of your map and then making the added approximation that only one "thing" can be in a given grid on the map. Or you can only move in whole grid increments. This ties the granularity/accuracy of your combat to the scale of your map and the size of the grid pattern that you choose. If you scale your map to 1"/2m and then draw in 1/4" grids....this isn't too bad (due to previously discussed limits/margins of error). If you scale your map to 1"/2m and then draw in 1" grids....then you've roughly quartered your accuracy. You start approximating. You have stated a tendency to "round in the player's favor" for these approximations, skewing the numbers still further.

 

That's your lookout.....and it has absolutely nothing to do with changing the units of measure on Powers from inches (map scaling) to meters (real world).

 

Changing the units of measure on powers from inches to real world meters has one effect and one effect only: it gives an implied increase in accuracy of mesurements -- assuming that previously you could not purchase a 1/2" increment.

[dmjalund]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

shouldn't the turn mode be reduced by 2m per level. If not, then that would differ from 5e

[BoloOfEarth]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

shouldn't the turn mode be reduced by 2m per level. If not' date=' then that would differ from 5e[/quote']

 

Per 6E2-32, each Movement Level reduces Turn Mode by 1 (down to 0m).

[dmjalund]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

if we can confirm that 5e is 1" per level, then we definitely have a difference.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Yes, but I'd argue that it is a change in the function of Turn Mode, or how Movement Levels interact with them. It is not somehow "caused" by changing the unit of measurement.

[Simon]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Yes' date=' but I'd argue that it is a change in the function of Turn Mode, or how Movement Levels interact with them. It is not somehow "caused" by changing the unit of measurement.[/quote']

Exactly right.

[Gideon]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Here's a question, going back to the stadium - you pointed out it only fits on a standard map at 1:4, so you only ever drew half a stadium under prev editions which are 1:2? Resulting in the same problem you have now.

 

Also, did you never once find the need to adjust the scaling previously? You always, no matter what, used 1h=2m and never changed it?

 

If so, why don't you just do the same thing in 6th? We do in our weekly champions game, the GM likes the scale so he kept it.

 

Again, for at least the third time this thread, the only thing that has really changed is that you write down meters of movement instead of "inches" for example knockback is still in 2meter increments.

 

AoE is unchanged, 8m AoE is 8m at any scale the only issue arises if you never let more than on person occupy a hex, and we've allowed 2-3 normal sized people be in the same hex for years. Though sometimes that's a pile if you go over two. Example: we assumed two people in a Grab are in thw same hex.

 

Conclusion: the only change really made here is notation.

 

Not quite. I never actually said what it is I own and use for gaming. In fact I first mentioned using a map over 5 feet long.

 

The truth of the matter is that in the past, if my gaming group ended up having a fight with such a big scale we would generally play it without a map. Now before we get into arguments, I said we always use the rules for turn mode, not always use a map.

 

We also once or twice broke out the huge map (its actually larger than the table we were playing at), and used it, but characters and objects still ended up off the table and we needed to use markers to indicate distance and direction off the edge of the map (read as: edge of the table).

 

In general these things worked, but not always well. In fact, one fight on the big map resulted in an expensive mini getting knocked off the edge of the table and shattering . And one of the fights we played mapless ended with a PC's death partially due to confusion over the GM's description of the area.

 

Because of things like this, I was hoping to figure out a way to scale a map above 1:2, but of course, it seems I'm having problems figuring out the logistics of some of it. Which bothers me, because of just how severe a minority that puts me in.

 

You are right, none of the stuff has changed mathmatically. Its just that for some reason when scale was tied down to hexes we never really thought of trying to scale a map up or down. It just never seemed to occur as an option. Now that it is, I would like to try using it.

 

yes we have let more than one person occupy a hex, but that's with grabbing. Regardless of how many "hexes" you take up, if you are grabbed you effectively occupy the same space for rules mechanics. If a person is always assumed to take up a 1m space, then you can fit 2 people in a 2m space, but you can fit 16 people in a 4m space.

 

Try this: take out a piece of hex paper, keeping each hex on the paper as 1h=1m, DRAW a hex that is 2m. You need to keep the middle of a pre-drawn hex as the middle of your new larger hex. The result is a hex that occupies half a hex more space in all directions.

 

Now try it with a hex that is 4m. You end up with 13 full hexes and 6 half hexes (f you don't accidentally rotate the hex 90 degrees).

 

My question becomes again: how do I represent this on a map at my table. We are not talking about people grabbing and wrestling with each other which means they are TRYING to occupy the same space. We are talking about somewhere between 2 and 16 people standing around, not necisarily coming into physical contact all being represented as occupying the same map space.

 

Oh, and your right when it comes to AoE at 8m, it doesn't matter on a 1h=4m map you hit two hexes in all directions. But it does matter if you have a 1m or 2m radius it suddenly matters.

 

If I have a 1m AoE attack we can simply assume that I can put it in the center of the 2m hex and effect any normal size person because no matter what you occupy at least half of the center hex. 2m AoE just occupies the whole space so it doesn't matter.

 

With a 4m hex though it matters because I no longer fill the whole area. No matter where I put my 1m or 2m AoE radius blast inside the 4m hex, there is significant space I will miss. Space large enough to fit 12 people in fact. So how do I determine who I affect?

[Gideon]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Yes' date=' but I'd argue that it is a change in the function of Turn Mode, or how Movement Levels interact with them. It is not somehow "caused" by changing the unit of measurement.[/quote']Only in so much as relates to moving in increments of 1m instead of 2m. But for the most part I agree with you.

 

Never-the-less this is an issue related to the use of 1m units of measure instead of 2m units of measure. Which was part of the OP's initial questioning.

[Simon]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Only in so much as relates to moving in increments of 1m instead of 2m. But for the most part I agree with you.

 

Never-the-less this is an issue related to the use of 1m units of measure instead of 2m units of measure. Which was part of the OP's initial questioning.

No, it is not. It is a change in the cost structure of the ability that has absolutely nothing to do with a change from "hexes" to 1m increments.

[Simon]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Not quite. I never actually said what it is I own and use for gaming. In fact I first mentioned using a map over 5 feet long.

 

The truth of the matter is that in the past, if my gaming group ended up having a fight with such a big scale we would generally play it without a map. Now before we get into arguments, I said we always use the rules for turn mode, not always use a map.

 

We also once or twice broke out the huge map (its actually larger than the table we were playing at), and used it, but characters and objects still ended up off the table and we needed to use markers to indicate distance and direction off the edge of the map (read as: edge of the table).

 

In general these things worked, but not always well. In fact, one fight on the big map resulted in an expensive mini getting knocked off the edge of the table and shattering . And one of the fights we played mapless ended with a PC's death partially due to confusion over the GM's description of the area.

 

Because of things like this, I was hoping to figure out a way to scale a map above 1:2, but of course, it seems I'm having problems figuring out the logistics of some of it. Which bothers me, because of just how severe a minority that puts me in.

 

You are right, none of the stuff has changed mathmatically. Its just that for some reason when scale was tied down to hexes we never really thought of trying to scale a map up or down. It just never seemed to occur as an option. Now that it is, I would like to try using it.

 

yes we have let more than one person occupy a hex, but that's with grabbing. Regardless of how many "hexes" you take up, if you are grabbed you effectively occupy the same space for rules mechanics. If a person is always assumed to take up a 1m space, then you can fit 2 people in a 2m space, but you can fit 16 people in a 4m space.

 

Try this: take out a piece of hex paper, keeping each hex on the paper as 1h=1m, DRAW a hex that is 2m. You need to keep the middle of a pre-drawn hex as the middle of your new larger hex. The result is a hex that occupies half a hex more space in all directions.

 

Now try it with a hex that is 4m. You end up with 13 full hexes and 6 half hexes (f you don't accidentally rotate the hex 90 degrees).

 

My question becomes again: how do I represent this on a map at my table. We are not talking about people grabbing and wrestling with each other which means they are TRYING to occupy the same space. We are talking about somewhere between 2 and 16 people standing around, not necisarily coming into physical contact all being represented as occupying the same map space.

 

Oh, and your right when it comes to AoE at 8m, it doesn't matter on a 1h=4m map you hit two hexes in all directions. But it does matter if you have a 1m or 2m radius it suddenly matters.

 

If I have a 1m AoE attack we can simply assume that I can put it in the center of the 2m hex and effect any normal size person because no matter what you occupy at least half of the center hex. 2m AoE just occupies the whole space so it doesn't matter.

 

With a 4m hex though it matters because I no longer fill the whole area. No matter where I put my 1m or 2m AoE radius blast inside the 4m hex, there is significant space I will miss. Space large enough to fit 12 people in fact. So how do I determine who I affect?

 

You're once again confusing yourself with scale on the map, grid length, and accuracy.

 

1. You can have more than one "item" in a given unit area (hexes, squares, etc.). You're going to need to in order to even come close to reality, PARTICULARLY when you increase the scale of your map.

 

2. You can note movement, area, length, distance, etc. independently of the grid on the map. The grid is there as a guide, nothing more. You can have a blast that covers 1/4 of a particular hex....just like trees, buildings, and other objects frequently cover partial hexes (or whatever you're using for a grid).

 

3. Increasing the scale on your map tends to take you out of the range that you can measure HTH combat, if you're looking to keep things with the level of accuracy denoted in most RPGs. You can still do it, but you'll likely need to make a very fine grid (e.g. 1"/4m on the map with grid pattern of 1/4" or less).

 

ONCE AGAIN: this has nothing to do with a change from "inches" to meters within the game's notation. The only effect that has is to double the degree of accuracy you can attain in defining abilities.

[Zed-F]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Because of things like this' date=' I was hoping to figure out a way to scale a map above 1:2, but of course, it seems I'm having problems figuring out the logistics of some of it. Which bothers me, because of just how severe a minority that puts me in.[/quote']

 

I would say the easiest thing to do, if you want to use an arbitrary scaled map, is this:

 

Just forget the hexes.

 

Plop down the terrain. Make note of the scale of the terrain. Then use a ruler and measure everything to scale. No worries about what's in what hex. If you have an AoE, pick your center point and measure how far in each direction it extends.

 

This is exactly how it's been done for a very long time in most other wargames that are miniature-based. It has worked well for a very long time. If you have miniatures, and a map, you really don't need hexes at all. As Dan mentioned, they are just a measurement convenience; if they are causing you more trouble than they are worth, forget them.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

I'm seeing where the disconnect is, I think.

 

You are right, none of the stuff has changed mathmatically. Its just that for some reason when scale was tied down to hexes we never really thought of trying to scale a map up or down. It just never seemed to occur as an option. Now that it is, I would like to try using it.

 

yes we have let more than one person occupy a hex, but that's with grabbing. Regardless of how many "hexes" you take up, if you are grabbed you effectively occupy the same space for rules mechanics. If a person is always assumed to take up a 1m space, then you can fit 2 people in a 2m space, but you can fit 16 people in a 4m space.

 

Try this: take out a piece of hex paper, keeping each hex on the paper as 1h=1m, DRAW a hex that is 2m. You need to keep the middle of a pre-drawn hex as the middle of your new larger hex. The result is a hex that occupies half a hex more space in all directions.

 

Now try it with a hex that is 4m. You end up with 13 full hexes and 6 half hexes (f you don't accidentally rotate the hex 90 degrees).

 

My question becomes again: how do I represent this on a map at my table. We are not talking about people grabbing and wrestling with each other which means they are TRYING to occupy the same space. We are talking about somewhere between 2 and 16 people standing around, not necisarily coming into physical contact all being represented as occupying the same map space.

 

The answer is... however you need to. If you're using hexes, decide on your scale and use it. If you're going to insist on using hexes, it's probably best to use 2m hexes and stick with the way it's always been done, just because there's lots of precedent and info available in previous editions.

 

But 5E->6E hasn't gone from 2 meter hexes to 1 meter hexes. It's gone from 2 meter hexes to non-gridded, ordinary meters. There are no hexes anymore, period. If you, for instance, have an AOE attack, you target it wherever you want to target it. Use a tape measure or a compass (the kind that uses a pencil to draw circles) to mark your radius. It's a circle; you don't need to worry about hex anything.

 

A person is assumed to take up a 1 meter by 1 meter space. It's not that a person now takes up a 1 meter hex; it can be a circle or a square or a triangle, for all that the game cares.

 

There's lots of tabletop miniatures gaming that doesn't use grids of any kind; we can look to them for guidance. But it seems to me to be pretty straightforward; when I ran it, no one at the table seemed to have any conceptual difficulty, and I didn't have any prior experience with non-gridded combat of any kind.

[torchwolf]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Serious, extensive, and informed attempts to answer this have been made, so these comments may be superfluous, in which case you might just want to ignore the following.

 

You are right' date=' none of the stuff has changed mathmatically. Its just that for some reason when scale was tied down to hexes we never really thought of trying to scale a map up or down. It just never seemed to occur as an option. Now that it is, I would like to try using it.[/quote']

Having the basic movement and distance unit at 1m actually makes it a bit more exact when scaling, and makes round-offs for half-moves and turn modes more granular when scaling up or down (though as Simon points out, you will likely be scaling up).

 

yes we have let more than one person occupy a hex' date=' but that's with grabbing. Regardless of how many "hexes" you take up, if you are grabbed you effectively occupy the same space for rules mechanics. If a person is always assumed to take up a 1m space, then you can fit 2 people in a 2m space, but you can fit 16 people in a 4m space.[/quote']

Yes, but that's assuming they're not moving around.

 

My question becomes again: how do I represent this on a map at my table. We are not talking about people grabbing and wrestling with each other which means they are TRYING to occupy the same space. We are talking about somewhere between 2 and 16 people standing around' date=' not necisarily coming into physical contact all being represented as occupying the same map space.[/quote']

Any maneuvering at all, including just performing Combat Maneuvers, would make their position change slightly, continually. Consider a Crescent Kick Block or Flying Kick (not to mention Dodge): quite a few Maneuvers require some minor movement in combination with it, even if a character isn't using Movement as an Action.

I'd venture that the exact position of a character is an abstraction; like an electron cloud, you can assume a center or general position during a defined time interval, but it is still an approximation.

A scale of 1m per hex or larger doesn't change this other than making it more of a GM call exactly where a character is at a point in time depending on what he is doing; engaging in HTH place the involved characters at an abstracted average distance from each other of about 1m, or at weapon length of the character with highest DEX, etc.

To make it even more realistic on a battle map you could of course consider a character using Movement to be located at a point somewhere along his movement path, from beginning to end (a path 12m long for a normal FMove for instance) and allow an attacker a chance to attack that target at any point during that movement path, possibly restricted by the attacker having a Held Action, and/or by making a DEX-off, etc. That can quickly get extremely complex for fairly little benefit in enjoyment though.

 

If I have a 1m AoE attack we can simply assume that I can put it in the center of the 2m hex and effect any normal size person because no matter what you occupy at least half of the center hex. 2m AoE just occupies the whole space so it doesn't matter.

 

With a 4m hex though it matters because I no longer fill the whole area. No matter where I put my 1m or 2m AoE radius blast inside the 4m hex, there is significant space I will miss. Space large enough to fit 12 people in fact. So how do I determine who I affect?

I can only see three obvious options, regardless of scale:

1) measure the exact distance to the center of the miniature bases representing the possible targets (i.e., since an AoE has a radius, place the center of the AoE where you will and measure from that; this constitutes the 'target zone').

2) randomize which of the possible targets are within the 'target zone' based on their previous and declared actions.

3) GM call (this is probably the only way to resolve it at large enough scales without having a separate mini-map for tactical representation).

 

Hope any of that helps, assuming I understood what you were thinking about.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

If I have a 1m AoE attack we can simply assume that I can put it in the center of the 2m hex and effect any normal size person because no matter what you occupy at least half of the center hex. 2m AoE just occupies the whole space so it doesn't matter.

 

With a 4m hex though it matters because I no longer fill the whole area. No matter where I put my 1m or 2m AoE radius blast inside the 4m hex, there is significant space I will miss. Space large enough to fit 12 people in fact. So how do I determine who I affect?

First, 2 meter radius attack will fill a hex that is 4 meter in diameter. I know that’s besides the point, but it has to be mentioned.

As to your question “So how do I determine who I affect?” I’m having trouble taking this question seriously, but I’ll try. You affect who/the space, that you aimed at. You aim at the guy in the top left corner of your 4 meter hex and if you roll a successful hit, then that’s the center of the AoE. The fact that you decided to change the scale of the map does not change how attacks work in the game.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

I get the feeling that a fundamental difference of perception is occurring here. The same points keep being made with different wording from both sides. I'm starting to think that anyone who by this point doesn't "get" why some people think this is problematic, or why other people think it isn't, won't be swayed by more discussion.

[Simon]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Except that the folks (like Gideon and Balabanto) who appear to think that the change affects things like AOE and movement are fundamentally wrong/misguided in their interpretation of how things work on a map. This is not a debate of rules -- there's really nothing to debate. It's not a "well....maybe we're just not seeing eye to eye" -- there really _is_ a right way and a wrong way to do things....at least, according to the rules and according to common sense, which is what the system is supposed to be all about.

 

Gideon seems to be stating that someone with 35m of Running will move to the closest full hex on a hex-grid map. Regardless of scale. So if the scale was, say, 1"/10m, the character would run 4" on the map...or 40m. This is fundamentally (and logically) flawed/incorrect. To take a more extreme example, if you have a map that depicts the country with a scale of 1"/10,000m (note: still a freakishly huge map), characters do not suddenly get AOE attacks that cover an entire state. Nor can they leap across the state in a single bound.

 

A character with 35m of Running is able to run.....35m. On a map with the scale set to 1"/1,000,000m, that character can still run 35m. It will take them a LONG time to move across a single hex, if the map has a 1" hex overlay.

[Gideon]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Thank you Chris. Thank you torchwolf. And (might sound surprising) thank you Bigbywolfe.

 

I think I have figured out part of the problem I was having with the visualization. I am still having trouble figuring out how to represent where in a 4m area deliniated by a single 1 inch hex on a map each of up to 16 people are "standing". However I did figure out one of the problems I've been having.

 

I think part of it is that i have never really played a wargame, or a game that used area templates. Please correct me if I am misinterpreting what you've been saying, but I think its that I should keep the hexes used on the map and AoE separate.

 

See, having played Hero/ Champions for going on 14 years now, as well as D&D, I've always thought of AoE "conforming" to the shape of the spaces on the map. When you measure in hexes, you shape effects in hexes also. It was always area in hexes, but it isn't anymore.

 

They did IMO change more than just terms, and scale as relates to points spent on powers (2 meters of movement vs 1 meter of movement). They changed how using a map with "spaces" works. My 4m AoE blast used to be strange star-esq shape conforming to the shape of the hexes it occupied. Now its a circle on a hex-map, not conforming to the shape of the spaces and can overlap parts of spaces, and such because you are no longer aiming for the center of a hex, you are aiming for a point in space that can be anywhere within a given hex (or even directly on a line).

 

So again, thanks. Now I have an answer, I just need to decide what to do with it.

 

PS: the question about fitting people into one hex, is a real world logistical question, and one not related to the game mechanics.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

This points up the issues in buying amounts of movement, range, or area, that are not even amounts of hexes. Someone running a game using 10 meter hexes would be justified in charging 10 points per hex of movement; it would be really ill-advised for a GM to allow a character to buy individual meters of movement in that instance.

 

If a GM is going to insist on using hexes, then he ought to be consistent in his hex sizes, or else live with the problems.

 

If someone wants to scale down a map, the solution isn't to put more meters in a hex. The solution is to put more meters in an inch (centimeter, or whatever), and either use smaller hexes, or don't use hexes. Using a map where 1 inch equals 10 meters doesn't have to -- and in fact shouldn't -- mean 1 hex equals 10 meters.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

They did IMO change more than just terms' date=' and scale as relates to points spent on powers (2 meters of movement vs 1 meter of movement). They changed how using a map with "spaces" works.[/quote']

 

This is mostly correct -- the 6E rules don't assume that you're using spaces. In fact, it's not necessary to use spaces of any kind.

[bigbywolfe]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

This is mostly correct -- the 6E rules don't assume that you're using spaces. In fact' date=' it's not necessary to use spaces of any kind.[/quote']

Yes, but it wasn't necessary in 5E either, even if it was arguably assumed...

[ghost-angel]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

PS: the question about fitting people into one hex' date=' is a real world logistical question, and one not related to the game mechanics.[/quote']

 

Try this:

 

Get a second map, either a piece of paper (maybe an 11x17 piece) with a hex grid on it, this will be 1m Personal Space Hex Map; any time you get to something that goes below your scale (assuming your scale isn't too far from personal, say no more than 1"/Hex = 4-6m) you shift to the PSHM. On this map 1 Hex/Inch = 1 Meter. Always.

 

Now, on the big map, anytime multiple people occupy a Hex, mark each person on that map with a chit of some kind (I suggest these: Alea Tools Magnetic Markers) - then place the actual miniatures on the PSHM off to the side of an unused portion of the larger map, or a coffee table, or such. Now you have both the football field and the couple of yards that most (or some) of the fight is taking place on.

 

Yeah sure, you probably run into space issues, or just the issue of multiple maps - but you can utilize both a larger and smaller scale at once. It's a solution, weather it's the best or not I couldn't say. We're still using 1"=2m and not sweating the details.

 

As for the conforming AoE part ... one of my groups hasn't used anything but a whiteboard without a grid for years and years (or decades I think at this point) and have always measured out a circle. It didn't conform to a hex-grid under 5E, mechanically, either - people just did that because that's the grid they used and it made life easier.

[Zeropoint]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

I think I have figured out part of the problem I was having with the visualization. I am still having trouble figuring out how to represent where in a 4m area deliniated by a single 1 inch hex on a map each of up to 16 people are "standing". However I did figure out one of the problems I've been having.

 

Well, part of the problem would seem to be related to using 30mm miniatures at that scale, resulting in characters which are a scale 16 feet tall and correspondingly wide. If you get some 12mm figures and put them on 1/4" bases, then it will be quite easy to put 16 of them into a single hex.

 

As far as running a game without a grid, anyone who's ever played Warhammer 40,000 has the solution for you: use a tape measure for movement and ranging, and use transparent AOE templates to determine who/what is covered by an effect. Easy peasy!

 

Having player minis in the same scale as your map is pretty important, I'd think.

[Greywind]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Not important, but it definitely helps...

[Derek Hiemforth]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

Having player minis in the same scale as your map is pretty important' date=' I'd think.[/quote']I guess it can't be too important (at least, not to me), since I've been playing this game for a looong time, and virtually never had scale minis, nor felt any need for them...

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Why doesn't 6e use hexes as a unit of measurement?

 

So again' date=' thanks. Now I have an answer, I just need to decide what to do with it.[/quote']

 

I guess I was wrong about people not "getting it" after that discussion. I'm glad you got some resolution out of it, and it was gracious of you to say so.