question for people who play with a phisical grid (mostly 3.5, pathfinder, 5e in mind

[Myth27]

I'm making a dnd battlematt tablecloth (like this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/54rdi5/so_made_a_dnd_tablecloth_complete_with_battle/ )

I'm printing the grid pattern on a white tablecloth so I have all the freedom in the world, I was going for a simple square grid but then It occured to me that I might make some lines thicker to make counting easier but know I don't know wich lines :smallbiggrin: every 5? every 10? every 6? every 2? what do you think?

(for clarity this is what I mean when I say I can make some lines thicker like one every 5:
https://as2.ftcdn.net/v2/jpg/03/59/52/15/1000_F_359521508_eWz5y2Qdo1CG9VifTmnxy1SGfMIZLtTp. jpg)

[Greywander]

For 5e at least, most characters have 30 feet of movement. That's 6 squares. So that might be a good secondary division to use.

[Kurald Galain]

I'd go with every 5, because that's most natural for counting.

[ciopo]

Might I suggest exagons if you're making your own grid

[Mastikator]

I have a battlemat that has hexagons on one side and a grid on the other side. Hexagons are definitely cooler, make area of effect more easy. The pro with hexagons is they are bestagons, the con is that most actual rooms are actual rectangles :smallwink: and you'll be in dungeons anyway.

For a grid I've used actual plastic squares for 10x10 and 20x20 feet squares.

[Greywander]

The trick is to use a square grid, but divide each square into quarters. Then you can simulate hexagonal movement by moving 1 square in one direction and half a square in a perpendicular direction. (Basically, imagine a knight in chess, except the knight takes up a 2x2 area.) This gets you the best of both worlds, allowing for the use of both square tiles for level/world construction and hexagonal movement for combat.

If you want a quick and dirty way to distinguish between hex movement and rectangular movement, you can say that moving a full tile cardinally (rectangular movement) costs 5 feet of movement like normal, while moving in a hex pattern costs 6 feet (actually more like 5.77, but close enough). Since most characters in 5e have 30 feet of movement, it means they can either move 6 tiles cardinally, or 5 tiles in a hex pattern. For moving one full tile diagonally, it could cost 7 feet (actually 7.07, but close enough).

Alternatively, you could align the grid so that moving in a hex pattern had the base cost of 5 feet. In that case, moving cardinally would cost a little more than 4 feet (actually 4.33, but close enough), and moving diagonally would cost about 6 feet (actually 6.12, but close enough). Hmm, I think I like this one a bit better, actually. 4, 5, and 6 just seem like easier to use denominations than 5, 6, and 7 (edit: 4-5-6 also means you have easy half-square distances of 2 feet cardinally and 3 feet diagonally). Though the first set of measurements allows you to just copy existing square grid maps exactly with no need for alteration, since moving 1 tile cardinally is 5 feet for both of them.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I'd go with every 5, because that's most natural for counting.
Agreed.

That said, you might try look at/printing such grids-- it might be that some other number works better for you specifically.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Truth be, 10' is so much better for the DM. It's easier to count to three than six. Tokens/minis go in corners. Map drawing/rendering is so much easier in 10' as most sources are drawn to 10'.

10x10 also presents as less cluttered. This makes the game feel more like a fantasy game than a wargame.

The downside is AoEs are just slightly harder to judge. But I have handmade (clear sheets) cutouts I can drop, and use a simple metal ruler to measure center to center (just like any good wargamer of yore) to determine exact ranges.