Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-10-2024, 10:40 AM   #1
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default One Foot Hexes?

So this is a crazy idea that popped into my head, probably a result of the thread about the woes of finding GURPS-scale miniatures as well as my own concerns about how Reach works. Has anyone tried working with one foot hexes, instead of one yard hexes? This would result in SM+0 characters taking up a megahex (a 7-hex area - a central hex and each adjacent one), and would give better resolution for Reach - a punch now has a 1-2-foot Reach (and you could introduce rules for grappling that allows you to grab a foe at maximum Reach, but you need to get closer for a solid grapple), a kick has a 2-3-foot Reach, a shortsword might have a 3-4-foot Reach, etc. It could also allow for better resolution of movement, although there we run into the issue that base movement rate is equal to Basic Speed, which in turn is (DX+HT)/4, when what we'd need is something that's divided by 3 (so that fractions can simply turn into feet). (DX+HT-5)/3 would give baseline characters the same Speed 5 as the default rules, with each +1 to DX or HT being a +1/3 (instead of +1/4) to Speed, and +1 foot to Move. This also allows for better resolution for Steps - we could maintain the default rules that Steps are equal to Move/10 rounded up, in which case a default character would have a 2-foot Step (instead of a full yard) and those with Speed 3.33 (Move 10) or lower would only have a 1-foot Step... but those with Speed 7 (Move 21) or higher would have a 3-foot or larger Step. Or go with something like Move/5, round down (minimum 1 foot), which would give a character with Speed 5 (Move 15) a 3-foot step, Speed 6.67 (Move 20) a 4-foot step, Speed 8.33 (Move 25) a 5-foot step, etc.

But there would be issues doing this. I don't think a megahex-shaped base is very common*. Additionally, you'd either need large miniatures (1:12 scale rather than 1:36 scale) and a large gaming mat or you'd need very small (1/3" rather than 1") hexes, which I could see being problematic**. [5] for +0.25 Speed doesn't really work well with a divisor of 3 - you'd probably want to just make it [5] for +0.33 (which still means "DX or HT that doesn't add to Speed" has a [-5] discount), but then each +1 Speed is only [15] instead of [20] (and +1 Dodge would only be [10], but I kinda prefer that anyway). The cost of Move also needs a look, although there I'd be fine keeping with [5] per yard ([2] for +1 foot, [4] for +2 foot, [5] for +1 yard; a character with, say, Move 17 would probably be able to bump that up to 18 for only [1]).

*If they exist at all. Hexes line up decently well with megahexes, which may allow for hex bases to work alright, but there will probably be questions over exactly which hexes the character occupies. Particularly if using the below solution for the battle map, I suspect you'd basically need to 3d-print some custom bases and stick your figures on those.
**One possible solution here would be to have a battle map basically consisting of 1-inch megahexes with smaller hexes making them up (the lines for the megahexes would be thicker to make them obvious). Then, players can largely stick to doing things with the megahexes roughly akin to GURPS hexes (although note adjacent megahexes are only 1 foot from each other, so you'd want a full megahex between characters if there's supposed to be a yard of separation), but have the increased resolution of using the smaller hexes when needed.


What do people think? Is this something that would be workable, potentially-workable but requiring more effort than it's worth, or outright insurmountable?
__________________
GURPS Overhaul
Varyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2024, 04:13 PM   #2
Pursuivant
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

It seems like a good way to shrink the effective size of your maps by 2/3.

If you're trying to realistically fit two characters into a single hex, the smallest reasonable scale would be about 1/2-meter/yard per hex. That's enough to hold two relatively skinny Size 0 humanoids. A bigger/fatter person might take up an entire 1-yard/meter hex.

For a 1-inch hex map, the really old-school 15mm or 25mm metal figures worked well to fit 2 people into a single hex. ~35mm or larger figures have trouble fitting into a 1-inch hex. That's why I prefer paper figures.
Pursuivant is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2024, 05:45 PM   #3
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

Typically, the solution to higher resolution is to just not use hexes at all, plenty of wargames just determine things like range and movement with a ruler.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2024, 06:10 PM   #4
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuivant View Post
It seems like a good way to shrink the effective size of your maps by 2/3.
Yeah, that's an issue if you opt for 1:12 figures, but if smaller individual hexes (with each megahex being the same size as what a standard hex was) is doable, you'd still have the same amount of size. But I don't know if that's really doable - the hexes may be so small at that point as to interfere with play.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuivant View Post
If you're trying to realistically fit two characters into a single hex, the smallest reasonable scale would be about 1/2-meter/yard per hex. That's enough to hold two relatively skinny Size 0 humanoids. A bigger/fatter person might take up an entire 1-yard/meter hex.
A big part of it was about nuances of Reach, and wanting better resolution than C, 1, 2, etc. A previous idea I had was to have weapons (including natural ones like fists) have a single nominal Reach (or range of them for those you can shift your grip on, like polearms) but be able to strike 1 yard closer at -4 and 1 yard further also at -4 (the former based on the rules from Martial Arts on using longer weapons in close quarters, the latter on the fact that many All Out Attack options are roughly comparable to a +4 to hit and Long is one option there). You could then have shorter weapons be at a lower penalty to strike 1 yard closer and larger penalty to strike 1 yard further, and the opposite for longer weapons (so -2/-6 and -6/-2, for example). But parts of that don't really sit well with me, so I was instead thinking that breaks down Reach into feet rather than yards to get that resolution.

I also like that this allows for there to be a difference between "punching distance" (1-2 feet away) and "grappling distance" (overlapping megahexes - although you could still grapple at 1-2 feet away, it should probably work a bit differently). I also more organically allows Facing to work in Close Combat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Typically, the solution to higher resolution is to just not use hexes at all, plenty of wargames just determine things like range and movement with a ruler.
That's also an option, although I feel it would be annoying to need to whip out a ruler for basically everything... which I would assume is the whole reason hexmaps and the like were invented in the first place.


It does occur to me that this would probably be easier to implement with a tabletop program than at an actual physical tabletop.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul
Varyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2024, 06:15 PM   #5
Anthony
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varyon View Post
It does occur to me that this would probably be easier to implement with a tabletop program than at an actual physical tabletop.
Definitely. Just disable snap to grid on a VTT and you're done.
__________________
My GURPS site and Blog.
Anthony is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2024, 07:40 PM   #6
Rolando
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Panama
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

A good solution is going the other way around and make it more abstract.

Instead of hexes use areas and weapon reach have an impact in combat by comparing attacker vs defender reach and stuff like that.

Making an already abstracted construct more granular usually have the wrong impact in a game. It usually just make rules and in-game actions take longer, while not really simulating any reality better, just a more detailed and cumbersome abstraction.
Rolando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2024, 10:16 PM   #7
mburr0003
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varyon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Typically, the solution to higher resolution is to just not use hexes at all, plenty of wargames just determine things like range and movement with a ruler.
It does occur to me that this would probably be easier to implement with a tabletop program than at an actual physical tabletop.
Some of us already carry tape measures in our kits because we wargame anyway... and I've done this for a few GURPS campaigns, it's not hard, and you can premake movement "rulers" for individual PCs, they lay them and it shows them their maximum straight line move range, or give them "movement cords" so they can bend the string around corners, etc.
mburr0003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2024, 11:48 PM   #8
Eric Funk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Earth
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mburr0003 View Post
Some of us already carry tape measures in our kits because we wargame anyway... and I've done this for a few GURPS campaigns, it's not hard, and you can premake movement "rulers" for individual PCs, they lay them and it shows them their maximum straight line move range, or give them "movement cords" so they can bend the string around corners, etc.
You could print out a few copies of this free pdf and note ranges of weapons on the printout, which I think is to scale for hexes (although I don't have one on me at the moment):

https://warehouse23.com/products/gurps-range-ruler
__________________
-
"Knowledge Brings Fear" -- Motto of Mars University, Futurama

Last edited by Eric Funk; 10-11-2024 at 11:49 PM. Reason: spell
Eric Funk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2024, 11:57 PM   #9
Eric Funk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Earth
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

I apologise for a partial reply but will re-read and try to ponder the implications during daylight.

I will start with RAW p. B384 indicates four average humans not fighting can fit in a normal hex. ( I assume such as in a crowded train/bus).
Note also a prone average human occupies two standard hexes (assuming 6'/2y long, although technically an SM+0 humanoid could be 6.9 feet tall p.B20)


I'm thinking one might need to do something with extending the free "Step" for combat manevbers to 3 similar 1' hex movements, but will weigh more.

Thanks for the thought experiment!
__________________
-
"Knowledge Brings Fear" -- Motto of Mars University, Futurama
Eric Funk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2024, 12:28 PM   #10
Varyon
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Default Re: One Foot Hexes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony View Post
Definitely. Just disable snap to grid on a VTT and you're done.
Apologies, what I meant was that the 1 foot hex would be easier on a VTT, as you don't have to worry about hexes that are too small to interact with, taking up an excessive amount of space, attaching figures to appropriate-shaped bases, etc. But if VTT's also allow for freeform movement, and do the measuring for you, you could certainly just do away with the grid from the beginning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Funk View Post
I'm thinking one might need to do something with extending the free "Step" for combat manevbers to 3 similar 1' hex movements, but will weigh more.
Yeah, how far the Step goes needs to be considered. I noted two options to do it above - if sticking with the default of Move/10, round up, an average person with Move 15' would have a 1.5' Step, which rounds up to 2'. You'd need Move 21' or higher (corresponding to Speed 7) to have the default 3' Step. Alternatively, Move/5, round down (minimum 1') would give Move 15' a 3' Step, Move 20' a 4' Step, and so forth. Have a table; distances are in feet, Opt1 corresponds to Move/10, round up, while Opt2 corresponds to Move/5, round down, minimum 1. I went all the way up to a Step of 30' (10 yards, requiring Move 91 yards or more). Values are the minimum Move rate needed for such a Step.
Code:
Step	RAW	Opt1	Opt2
1	-	1	1
2	-	11	10
3	3	21	15
4	-	31	20
5	-	41	25
6	33	51	30
7	-	61	35
8	-	71	40
9	63	81	45
10	-	91	50
11	-	101	55
12	93	111	60
13	-	121	65
14	-	131	70
15	123	141	75
16	-	151	80
17	-	161	85
18	153	171	90
19	-	181	95
20	-	191	100
21	183	201	105
22	-	211	110
23	-	221	115
24	213	231	120
25	-	241	125
26	-	251	130
27	243	261	135
28	-	271	140
29	-	281	145
30	273	291	150
...

Something that occurs to me, if opting to generally use megahexes and only use the constituent hexes when needed, it may be useful to list things like Move, Reach, etc as a smaller number. Flashing back to when I first started learning division (a long time ago), before we learned about decimals, fractions, etc, things that didn't divide perfectly wound up with a Remainder, which I believe was designated R1, R2, etc. For example, 10 divided by 3 would be 3R1. Using something similar here would also work. For a character with, say, DX 13 and HT 12, rather than having Speed 6.67 and Move 20' (Step 2' or 4', depending on which option you go with), you could simply write both as 6R2. This also makes it easier to explain the pricing for Move - it's [2] for +R1, [4] for +R2, and [5] for a full +1. Note this means the above character could go up to Move 7 for only [1], as that's the difference between +R2 (what they have now) and +1. A weapon with Reach 5'-6' would instead have Reach 1R2-2. That's tougher to handle Steps with, but as that's not something you generally need to calculate at the table, it's probably alright to have that calculation be a bit more involved. This would be as follows: multiply the integer value by 3, then add the remainder value as an integer to the result. Divide by either 10 or 5, then round either up or down. Finally, divide this final value by 3 and designate the remainder as such. For 6R2, that becomes 3x6 = 18 + 2 = 20; dividing by 10 makes this 2, dividing by 5 makes it 4. The former becomes R2, the latter becomes 1R1.

Note some groups would be perfectly fine keeping Speed a decimal value and/or Move in feet rather than yards, in which case you could do it that way and ignore the Remainder designations. But it's an option.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul
Varyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.