Questions of the Grid

[rlucci]

Have you ever tried to figure out distances between hex squares? Other than the old point and count method, most people would be stumped as to how to go about it mathematically. The point is we’ve all been taught the X-Y Cartesian coordinate system. It’s perfectly suited for measuring on flat surfaces and for most of us, it’s... comfortable (for lack of a better word).

But to RPMiller’s point, constraining oneself to a grid – even a hex grid – makes for fairly unrealistic maps. And to that, I have to agree. If the mechanics of one's game doesn't depend on the grid, I would be happy to see it go by the wayside.

But for those of us who are stuck with grid-based game mechanics, how about a compromise? We could draw the map first and then, instead of just plopping a full grid over the top of it, we could lay and align sections of the grid over various elements of the map. I’ll upload a chunk of my Mines map to illustrate what I’m talking about.

-RLucci

[RPMiller]

I think I have to be clearer...

Related to the grid questions:

I have no problems with using a square grid to draw on.
I have a problem with a map constraining itself to those grids just for convenience.
I do not understand the need to use the square grid for the actual playing when there are inherent problems with using it and the mechanics have to be made complex to deal with them.

Related to the "always been done that way" discussion:

I do not understand the cognitive dissonance that people are willing to put up with for no apparent reason when it is so much easier to just make the change and move on.