Ye Olde Inn

by **Big Bene** » October 7th, 2016, 9:52 am

First' I'd like to say I don't want to talk too much about this yet - very probably, I won't manage to free the time I would need for this, and I don't want to stand out as the guy who talks big and delivers nothing...
You see, I just wanted to buy some of the mini plates and start experimenting how the floor plates would work out. Having thought about this for some time, I really couldn't decide if 24x24 or 32x32mm would be better, so I asked at the inn.

Having said this -

Will your walls take up a tile resulting in longer passages or built on edges of tiles like the original?

Well, I answered this here:

I would insert narrow "sill" floor pieces in the corridors to make up for the wall space of the rooms.

but perhaps it wasn't quite clear. So here we go: The walls thicknes will be 1 Lego knob = 8mm = 1 quarter of the floor tile size. The walls will be between the squares, not occupying parts of a square. To make up for this extra space the neighboring corridors or rooms have narrow "inter-plates" ("Sills") between them. The sills will me made to look like wooden planks and I hope they won't disturb the look too much. In terms of rules, the sills don't exist. Two squares with a sill between them count as "adjactant":

Unbenannt.jpg

Big Bene wrote:First' I'd like to say I don't want to talk too much about this yet - very probably, I won't manage to free the time I would need for this, and I don't want to stand out as the guy who talks big and delivers nothing...
You see, I just wanted to buy some of the mini plates and start experimenting how the floor plates would work out. Having thought about this for some time, I really couldn't decide if 24x24 or 32x32mm would be better, so I asked at the inn.

Having said this -
Will your walls take up a tile resulting in longer passages or built on edges of tiles like the original?

Well, I answered this here:
I would insert narrow "sill" floor pieces in the corridors to make up for the wall space of the rooms.

but perhaps it wasn't quite clear. So here we go: The walls thicknes will be 1 Lego knob = 8mm = 1 quarter of the floor tile size. The walls will be between the squares, not occupying parts of a square. To make up for this extra space the neighboring corridors or rooms have narrow "inter-plates" ("Sills") between them. The sills will me made to look like wooden planks and I hope they won't disturb the look too much. In terms of rules, the sills don't exist. Two squares with a sill between them count as "adjactant":
Unbenannt.jpg

I misunderstood before.
I thought you'd wanna snap Lego tiles (the studless plates, Lego terminology) between the outer studs of the squares (not to confuse anyone, let's call these squares now, not tiles which is a form of Lego part).
Like this, just with a tile stuck between the studs, not a normal (studded) plate
AND with that tile sticking between two square plates:

To make that work, however, you would need Lego (plates, probably) underneath the 4x4 plates to fix the squares to each other for them to be able to hold the walls.
Does anyone get what I'm talking about here? I confuse myself trying to imagine,
but it is the only way to keep the original board's layout with the same number of squares and walls staying neutral in terms of changing distances.

It is a great plan if you wanna prebuild some layouts (room size or let's say 4x4 squares) that you can connect before the game and then stick the walls in wherever you want.
Disadvantage: the color pattern has to be rather uniform all through the design.

by **Big Bene** » October 10th, 2016, 3:04 am

knightkrawler wrote:I think the question of 24mm vs. 32mm answers itself - there's no 3x3 plates as far as I know and if there are then *lemony goodness*'s gonna be reeeeallly expensive.

Yeah, I'm aware of this. I would have had to make up 3x3 plates using a 2x3 and a 1x3 plate each. As they are covered with the modelled surface, the split will not be visible - but of course, it means extra work to do. But my main aim is a good looking board, so I at least considered doing so.

knightkrawler wrote:I misunderstood before.
I thought you'd wanna snap Lego tiles (the studless plates, Lego terminology) between the outer studs of the squares (not to confuse anyone, let's call these squares now, not tiles which is a form of Lego part).
Like this, just with a tile stuck between the studs, not a normal (studded) plate AND with that tile sticking between two square plates.
To make that work, however, you would need Lego (plates, probably) underneath the 4x4 plates to fix the squares to each other for them to be able to hold the walls.
Does anyone get what I'm talking about here? I confuse myself trying to imagine,
but it is the only way to keep the original board's layout with the same number of squares and walls staying neutral in terms of changing distances.

Well, that's an idea - hadn't thought of this possibility before.
But still, there are several reasons I prefer my original design:
- Lego knobs/studs would have to be present at the surface to hold the wall. I do not want any knobs to remain visible.
- Thin walls are a good thing, HQ-wise, but these would be too thin. I want to give the walls some structure.
- They would be not as easy to replace as walls of 1-knob-wide bricks. Easy replacing (to add doors in-game) was one of the main reasons to start with.
- plus:

knightkrawler wrote:To make that work, however, you would need Lego (plates, probably) underneath the 4x4 plates to fix the squares to each other for them to be able to hold the walls.
Does anyone get what I'm talking about here? I confuse myself trying to imagine,

Yes, I understand. And it would be a problem.

whitebeard wrote:This sounds like a huge Green stuff effort!

Great effort, yes, but certainly not Green stuff. Much to overpriced. Milliput perhaps. But probably I will make prototypes of Fimo or even kindergarten putty and cast the "overlays" in resin or plaster. If I ever do this at all, actually.

by **knightkrawler** » October 10th, 2016, 3:39 am

If you go through with this plan, you still need to think about offsets in a finished layout,
like the bottom left quadrant of the original HQ board, with the two 2x3 rooms.
This goes for every instance of two different numbers of rooms parallely in the same direction offsetting the placing of squares against walls/sills.

I almost made that mistake planning my own 2.5D dungeon.
I take it you wanna retain the option to lay out the original board, right?

by **Big Bene** » October 10th, 2016, 8:39 am

knightkrawler wrote:I take it you wanna retain the option to lay out the original board, right?

By all means.
Not only as an option, but as the rule. Building the original HQ board is the main goal.
While every layout is possible, in my daytime dreams I play HQ on a perfect 3D version of the original HQ board. The conversability would be used to place doors, secret doors, traps, the occasional speical room, or every now and then a redesingned layout of a part of the board as a special surprise.

knightkrawler wrote:If you go through with this plan, you still need to think about offsets in a finished layout,
like the bottom left quadrant of the original HQ board, with the two 2x3 rooms.
This goes for every instance of two different numbers of rooms parallely in the same direction offsetting the placing of squares against walls/sills.

I actually thought of this before. My simple solution: more sills. In the left bottom quadrant, there would have to be a longer sill through the room adjactant to the two small ones. Of course, this would have to contiue through the whole hight of the board,
Perhaps I'm mikstaken and there are places it would not work, but I can't think of any. Perhaps I should make a layout plan on paper now...

Afterthought: If the sills don't look OK, perhaps I could make some 4x5 plates to fulfill the same purpose. Or sills that match various plate designs (not all wooden planks).

by **cornixt** » October 10th, 2016, 9:36 am

Big Bene wrote:
knightkrawler wrote:I think the question of 24mm vs. 32mm answers itself - there's no 3x3 plates as far as I know and if there are then *lemony goodness*'s gonna be reeeeallly expensive.
Yeah, I'm aware of this. I would have had to make up 3x3 plates using a 2x3 and a 1x3 plate each. As they are covered with the modelled surface, the split will not be visible - but of course, it means extra work to do. But my main aim is a good looking board, so I at least considered doing so.

You could actually do 6x6 squares and split it into 4 tiles, then use a few 3x3 of individual squares where you need them. It will save you a lot of work since 6x6 plates are easily available and cheaper than the bits to make four 3x3s.