How do you count megahexes?

[Scintillant]

Quite possibly a dumb question, but I don't see it addressed in the rules exactly how one measures this for missile spells/weapons.

If playing on a map with thick lines that denote the megahex boundaries, do you use those regardless of a character's positions within the megahex? Or, do you assume the attacker is always at the center of a virtual megahex regardless of the thick lines?

[Witchstar]

I’ve only recently played Melee for the first time, but we used the boundaries regardless of figure positioning. Doing so seems it speeds up play with only a small sacrifice in accuracy.

[Anaraxes]

Yes, you just count the megahexes as shown by the thick black lines. Pretend they were hexes. You don't care about exact positioning within a hex when you count hexes, right? You just count to the next thing with a border. Similarly, you don't care about exactly where in a megahex the start or destination is when you count range in megahexes. Just count to the next megahex border.

(The "labyrinth scale" maps represent megahexes with a single hex on those maps. So you might think of it as the range on a labyrinth map.)

[Shostak]

If you are playing on a board that has the megahexes delineated with thick lines, like the Melee or Wizard boards, the easiest thing is to just use the drawn megahexes. If using a hex mat or the dry-erase hexes, I think it easist to not draw all the megahexes and instead determine megahex range based on the figure originating a missile or creation as being in the center of their megahex.

[larsdangly]

The MH boundaries are there to make your life easier rather than harder - you just count how many MH's you pass through from A to B and that's it. This rule can be gamed for sure - particularly when you are casting creation spells. But that's fine; combat in TFT is a game meant to be gamed.

[XRaysVision]

Hum...this brings up a good question. If playing on a hex map without megahex marking, how would you estimate range in meghex terms?

I think I would count the number of hex’s divide by 3, diameter of a megahex, and then subtract 1, for the megahex the figure’s in, i.e. (range x 3) -1 = mh

For instance, a target 18 hexes away would be 5 megahexes distant. 13 hexes away would be 1 megahex.

Ideas?

[Anaraxes]

I've done the divide-by-three thing before. You don't need to subtract one -- just round down. (1 hex away is in your same megahex, and 2 might be.) I don't remember range being an issue very often, actually.

More problematic were areas of effect -- all those spells that are a megahex of fire, and so on. If those areas had to snap to the megahex grid (and they don't per the RAW - Wiz p13), it would limit where the wizard can put them to a fairly coarse granularity.

If you don't have a map you can draw on (and we now have dry-erase megahexes, yay!), it can be handy to have some spare megahexes to mark the AoEs, so the wizard can place the center in any hex. I've also gotten some mileage out of pipe cleaner / chenille stem circles of the proper size, as those are relatively easy to drop over minis in place without disturbing them. Those tend to slide around more easily, though.

[larsdangly]

I divide by 3 and round down. It is slightly less interesting to play this way because it removes a 'gameable' element of movement and maneuver. But it is close enough.`Re. megahex fire (etc.), I allow casters to choose the shape of the area of effect; i.e., any interconnected 7 hex area is fine.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by Witchstar

I’ve only recently played Melee for the first time, but we used the boundaries regardless of figure positioning. Doing so seems it speeds up play with only a small sacrifice in accuracy.

Same here. ISTR that was mentioned in Advanced Melee.

Originally Posted by XRaysVision

Hum...this brings up a good question. If playing on a hex map without megahex marking, how would you estimate range in meghex terms?

I think I would count the number of hex’s divide by 3, diameter of a megahex, and then subtract 1, for the megahex the figure’s in, i.e. (range x 3) -1 = mh

No... R/3 round down is a better fit.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by Anaraxes

I've done the divide-by-three thing before. You don't need to subtract one -- just round down. (1 hex away is in your same megahex, and 2 might be.) I don't remember range being an issue very often, actually.

More problematic were areas of effect -- all those spells that are a megahex of fire, and so on. If those areas had to snap to the megahex grid (and they don't per the RAW - Wiz p13), it would limit where the wizard can put them to a fairly coarse granularity.

If you don't have a map you can draw on (and we now have dry-erase megahexes, yay!), it can be handy to have some spare megahexes to mark the AoEs, so the wizard can place the center in any hex. I've also gotten some mileage out of pipe cleaner / chenille stem circles of the proper size, as those are relatively easy to drop over minis in place without disturbing them. Those tend to slide around more easily, though.

For spells we always just treated the target hex as the center of a MH for the purposes of area of effect. We DID find it useful to use some kind of marker to indicate the target hex for that purpose, though.