What size Hex bases would you use for the various sized D&D minis?

[DungeonMastering.com]

So my group is kicking around the idea of switching from the traditional squares for maps to hexes for maps. The d20 incarnation of Unearthed Arcana had a summary of some of the advantages of hexes:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/hexGrid.htm

However, since all plastic minis have circular bases, we need to find a way to transform a circle into a hexagon.

Came across a company that makes plastic hexagonal bases:
http://www.minairons.eu/en/74-hexagonal-bases?

But the question that we're not sure of is what size- in mm- would be best bases for:

Medium figures
Large figures
Huge figures
Gargantuan figures

Anyone have any ideas, on bases or about hexes in general?

[Ciaran Barnes]

I have used hex maps occasionally in the past just for fun and to change things up a bit. A figurine's circlular base is perfect - no need to change it. The square ones are a little weird though. As you are probably noticing, moving from a square map to a hex map doesn't require many changes to the way combat works. The changes are pretty intuitive, I think, and don't impact the game very much once everyone is on the same page.

For small and medium creatures I used a single hex. Large creatures use three hexes. Huge creatures use seven hexes. I never used anything bigger than those, but they might present a problem. Area effects like spells will change too, but are pretty easy to figure out. Just make sure that you and your players all sit down before the game and agree to what "shapes" everything will have. Once the changes are consistent, your game will run smoothly.

A few other things will change too, such as flanking and charging, but it's just different. I don't think anything actually ends up better or worse.

[DungeonMastering.com]

Arrrgh. Here is the hopefully correct links to the sites. The Unearthed Arcana rules:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/hexGrid.htm
And then here's the larger hex products I came across:

http://www.minairons.eu/en/74-hexagonal-bases

But what it looks like you'd have to do to fully utilize the advantages of hex-based combat is rather than have individual Large/Huge/Gargantuan hexes themselves is to instead make those bases out of a series of smaller hexes so they'd actually fit on a hex battlemat.

Does that make sense to people?

[Rub-Eta]

Your first link doesn't work. EDIT: see you fixed it.

I really have to warn you about using hexagonal grids: Pathfinder is built around the assumption that you use squares. Some rules needs to be changed, like Splash weapons and missing (while it does seem trivial to change 1d8 to 1d6, keep in mind that this also affects the probability). Some other rules will get really weird, like placement of larg monsters (should they occupy 3 or 4 hexes?) and certain movement. Some things can not be house rules to solve, like the changes with reach, flanking and the fact that there's less adjacent spaces.
Hexes are actually more restricted than squares. With squares you can move in 8 directions, back, forth, left, right and four diagonals. Hexes only allow movement in 6 directions, back&forth or left&right and diagonally(4).

I found that hexagonal grids created more problems than they solved, so I stoped using them. Though if you really want to use it, go ahead.

[Ciaran Barnes]

I recommend against buying those new hex bases. Keep them on circles. A large creature will just sit in the middle of three hexes. A huge creature occupies one hex plus the six hexes it shares edges with. The best thing to do it to start playing with hexes and address issues as they come up.

[Anonymous Visitor 163 576]

Some cardboard templates for spell effects and different size monsters, and you're there for $2. Just put them under the mini, and bam, you're there.

[DungeonMastering.com]

Hey folks, thanks for the replies.

Definitely not getting those plastic hexes that I linked to. Meanwhile cardboard is a cheap fix, but the idea with clear plastic is you can see underneath. And then there's the durability factor.

Regarding why getting hexes instead of keeping the as-is circles that minis are made with it, has to do with getting rid of the diagonal distance issue. But also wanting to use facing rules to liven things up. And these look to be easier to resolve with 6 sides:
Front, Front Left, Front Right, Rear, Rear Left, Rear Right.

Why?

While its true that switching from squares to hexagons in Pathfinder requires adjusting other aspects of the rules, it looks like doing so will make the game more tactical. I.e. moving around behind someone to avoid their shield & therefore negate that bonus.

I also see some of the disadvantages as advantages. Example being number of opponents that can surround 1 Medium figure. 6 with a hexagon base vs 8 with a square base. Both balance-wise + realism-wise, a half-dozen on 1 is better.

In answering my own question, it looks like what I need to do is make the larger hexagon bases out of smaller M-sized hexagons so that they can fit on a grid & within the 3.5 rules.

I'll see if I can come up with something to show as an example.